Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Paul Prescod <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: xml-dev <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 11:34:30 -0600
David Megginson wrote:
> No, actually, if the parser says that it can handle the SGML
> declaration that it happens to have read from some random place on
> your system, then you know that if your document happens to match that
> SGML declaration you'll get out what you expect. That model sucks
> too (even if it looked good on paper).
I haven't had this happen to me in practice. I agree that the SGML
declaration mechanism sucks but I've never had it silently fail on me.
Usually it vociferously fails! But that's neither here nor there: both
specs handle their optional features badly. SGML hides its option
declarations too far from the data and XML doesn't have option
declarations at all!
> SAX2, on the other hand, can take a stab classifying
> its parsers (as could the DOM).
That would be helpful.
Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
"Other Operating Environments Will Have Trouble Keeping up with Linux's
International Data Corporation bulletin
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)