xml-dev - Re: Requirements for making DTD validation work with namespaces

[Wayne Steele <xmlmaster@hotmail.com>]

>From: james anderson <james.anderson@mecomnet.de>
>
>The discussion becomes interesting only around "item 5" documents ...
>
Yes.


>The mechanism to which I alluded below neither ignores the problem nor
>does it entail parameter entities, and it conforms to three of the five
>constraints. Item 5 contradicts 1 and 2 and it doesn't make sense to
>implement both.

I don't see how item 5 contradicts 1 or 2.

It creates a new category of documents, distinct from "valid" and "invalid", 
as defined in XML 1.0.

How you define this category is the whole point - everyone seems to have 
ideas about this.

I will not budge from requirements 1 - 3.
3 is where a lot of proposals fall down.

-Wayne Steele

>
>====================
>Requirements for making DTD validation work with namespaces
>====================
>
>I submit that any "special" processor behavior needs to be 100% compatible
>with XML 1.0 and the XML Namespaces Rec:
>    1. All XML 1.0 Valid documents are still Valid;
>    2. All XML 1.0 Invalid documents are still Invalid;
>    3. All namespace declarations work just as in the XML Namespaces REC
>(whether document is Valid or not)
>
>    A frequent proposal is creation of a new definition of 
>"Namespace-Valid"
>XML Documents.
>I also submit that, for this to work:
>
>    4. ALL XML 1.0 documents that are Valid and conform to the XML 
>Namespaces
>REC, are considered to be "Namespace-Valid";
>    5. SOME XML 1.0 documents that are Well-Formed, Invalid, and conform to
>the XML Namespaces REC, are considered to be "Namespace-Valid".







________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com