Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Jonathan Borden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "David Megginson" <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 13:45:48 -0500
aha!! that changes things :-)
I had incorrectly assumed you were making an argument that DTDs *ought* only
be used for validation to prevent the problem we have identified.
Beyond requiring that external entities and default attributes be expanded,
is there a way to allow non- and validating parsers to process the same XML
documents in a functionally similar fashion, that is, the same SAX events be
fired or the same DOM tree be constructed whether or not validation is
>Jonathan Borden writes:
> > David Megginson wrote:
> > >
> > >There *is* a potentially nasty problem lurking here: the DTD may
> > >contain default values for attributes as well as validation
> > >information.
> > If DTDs *were* only for validation...
>As was probably clear from the rest of my message, the subject line
>was meant to read "DTDs are not just for validation".
>All the best,
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)