xml-dev - RE: deterministic content model

["Sarveshwar Rao Duddu" <duddu@vsnl.com>]

Yes,
Though the IBM's parser does not care to report the error, the rxp parser
does. Nice.
Thanks henry and matt for inputs.

Any ideas on this message that I posted some time back... (rxp also
recognizes < directly in entity declaration)


I have a doubt in whether or not it is legal to declare something like:

<!ENTITY lt "<">

or should we double escape it...

The spec (in section 4.6) double escapes it. The XML spec in XML in its
internal subset does not escape it, and that also
Works with IBMs xml parser.
Can somebody throw some light on it?

Regards,
Sarvesh
_________________________________________
The spec says (section 2.4)

"The ampersand character (&) and the left angle bracket (<) may appear in
their literal form only when used as markup delimiters, or within a comment,
a processing instruction, or a CDATA section. They are also legal within the
literal entity value of an internal entity declaration;"

and the errata asks us to delete the last sentence in the above:

"E18 Clarification Source: minutes XML-Syntax 1999-02-17 E18
Section 2.4
Delete the second sentence of the third paragraph, which reads: "They are
also legal within the literal entity value of an internal entity
declaration; see "4.3.2 Well-Formed Parsed Entities". "
Rationale:
This sentence is bogus. When & or < are in a literal entity value they are
being used as a markup delimiter, thus the whole second sentence is just
confusing static. "


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xml-dev@xml.org [mailto:owner-xml-dev@xml.org]On Behalf Of Henry
S. Thompson
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:47 PM
To: Sarveshwar Rao Duddu
Cc: Xmldev
Subject: Re: deterministic content model

"Sarveshwar Rao Duddu" <duddu@vsnl.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I was trying out
>
> <!ELEMENT test ((a, b)| (a, c))>
>
> in my DTD, and my parser did not give any error. I use IBM parser.
> Any idea if there is any parser out there which also checks for this type
of
> error?

If your parser claims to be validating, it is non-compliant if it
accepts the above model.  Most validating parsers (see any of the
standard tools lists) will get this right: RXP [1] certainly does.

ht

[1] http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~richard/rxp.html
--
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
                     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/

***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************


***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************