[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Deterministic Content Models (was DTD ( From EliotteRustHarold's Book))
- From: Rob Lugt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: David Brownell <email@example.com>, xml-dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:50:31 +0100
David Brownel wrote
> > "For compatibility, it is an error if an element in the document can
> > more than one occurrence of an element type in the content model. For
> > information, see E Deterministic Content Models."
> > ... the "For Compatibility" clause does
> > not indicate that an XML processor is free to ignore the constraint.
> The "it is an error" clause indicates that. If it's just an "error",
> not a "fatal error" or "validity error", reporting is optional.
> That's what the definitions section says up front.
While we're being pedantic ;-) there is no phrase "validity error" in the
document, but we all know what you mean.
The definition for "error" is defined as:
[Definition: A violation of the rules of this specification; results are
undefined. Conforming software may detect and report an error and may
recover from it.]
So, a processor may report the error, and may recover from it. But the
results are undefined.
Our XML Validator reports non-deterministic content models as errors for
good reason. We believe that our users want a validator to be as strict and
as accurate as possible ~ thereby maximising the chance that their xml will
be readable by any processor on any platform.