[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
[W. E. Perry
> Patrick Durusau can speak for himself, and may well disagree with my
> understanding, but in my opinion the JITTs processor operates downstream
> of XML parsing and of necessity has other inputs, and input assumptions,
> than the XML which a parser by itself processes. I build processors
> downstream from XML parsing in just this way and, yes, you are correct
> that for the inputs for which they are designed--and which they are
> specifically expert in handling--such processors must enjoy the autonomous
> authority to proceed on their own rules. It is only that whatever portion
> of their input is XML is subject to XML parsing, including the expected
> well-formedness checks, upon every use.
>
I have been looking at JITTs processing in more-or-less the reverse sense.
Conceptually, you could preprocess a JITTs document to remove any markup
that was not being asked for. You would then send the preprocessed document
through an xml processor, which would parse the surviving markup. Patrick,
is that a reasonable way to look at it? Of course, actual implementations
may work in some other ways.
I am not clear whether JITTS intends the surviving markup to always be
well-formed xml, but that is my impression so far. I do not see how you
create documents with multiple sets of markup and be sure that any one set
is valid against a schema (save by preprocessing it and then validating, but
I am thinking about during the authoring process)
Cheers,
Tom P
|
