[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: crism@exemplary.net (Christopher R. Maden)
- To: xml-dev@xml.org
- Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:56:29 -0800
[Takuki Kamiya]
>Morus Walter <morus.walter@gmx.de> wrote:
>> The test suite says test 'valid-sa-094' (from James Clarks test cases) to be
>> not wellformed.
The test is correct.
>> <!DOCTYPE doc [
>> <!ENTITY % e "foo">
>> <!ELEMENT doc (#PCDATA)>
>> <!ATTLIST doc a1 CDATA "%e;">
Parameter entities in an internal subset must expand to an integral number
of declarations. This does not; it is in error.
>> ]>
>> <doc></doc>
>> The problem they see, seems to be the "%e;" in the attribute value.
>> If this is a PEreference, it would be forbidden in the internal subset.
>> However I don't think it is one. Attribute values are defined as
>> [10]
>> AttValue
>> ::=
>> '"' ([^<&"] | Reference)*
>> '"'
>> | "'" ([^<&']
>> | Reference)* "'"
>> so '%' does not have a special meaning here. Hence I would not regard this
>> as an entity reference. Any comments on that?
It's not an attribute value, not yet. The spec clearly states that
productions describing DTDs are to be considered after expansion of
parameter entities.
>Test case "valid-sa-094" is one of those we found to be erraneous when we
>conducted conformance tests.
I believe that that finding is in error.
-Chris
--
Christopher R. Maden, Solutions Architect
Yomu (formerly Exemplary Technologies)
One Embarcadero Center, Ste. 2405
San Francisco, CA 94111
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
