[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Right, but mechanically, one has to ask the instance
before getting the schema. It seems inefficient.
And with a DOCTYPE, one could parse subtrees by
changing that value and ignoring the outer
tags. Not always but occasionally useful so
yet another lost functionality.
len
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" scripsit:
> Wouldn't it have been better to provide something
> analogous to DOCTYPE support where
>
> <!DOCTYPE thisIsTheROOTforThisPass
>
> is explicit rathen than relying on syntactic
> position which may be accidental?
Not really. In SGML the DOCTYPE declaration had to say what the root
was, because the start-tag of the root element might not appear in the
instance due to start-tag omission. In XML there is no start-tag
omission, so it is redundant to specify the root in the DOCTYPE declaration,
as it always must agree with the first and last tags in the instance.
|
