Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: james anderson <James.Anderson@mecomnet.de>
- To: XML Dev <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 00:02:38 +0200
Tim Bray wrote:
> At 05:00 PM 8/11/98 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> [interpreting james anderson]
> >Here's my take on it. Suppose you have the fragment:
> > <foo:a>This is <b>mixed</b>content</foo:a>
> >where "foo" is not a previously declared prefix. One must then consult
Even if a declaration has appeared, what is the processor to do were (given
the present definitions for declaration scope) the "intended" element was
associated with an attribute declaration which included a default value for
the respective attribute?
> >the DTD to see whether the element declaration for "foo:a" contains
> >a default (or fixed) value for the "xmlns:foo" attribute. If not,
> >a namespace constraint has been violated.
> You go on to raise the issue in greater detail, but it is clearly
> the case that the rules have to be spelt out. For example, it's
> obvious to me that for a non-validating parser, if he hits <foo:a>
> and hasn't seen an xmlns:foo= in his encestry, the situation is
> broken. Should the spec mandate that in this case, a conforming
> program has to go and fetch any and all external parts of the
> DTD to make sure there isn't a default declaration? Good question.
> I think the answer has to be "no", thus putting the onus on the author
> either to (a) use a validating processor or
> (b) have standalone="true".
How is the validating processor to do this unless either
a, it elevates the prefixes to global status,
b, it has a means is to determine the corresponding universal names for
qualified names in the DTD?
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)