[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Anthony B. Coates scripsit:
> I'm not convinced by the argument in this document that the internal DTD subset
> is a sufficient/appropriate place for the definition of any and all named
> character/string entities. The problem is that once you start using the
> internal DTD subset, you have to have an ELEMENT declaration for every element
> in the document, as well as ATTLIST declarations. All of this just because you
> wanted to define " " for an otherwise well-formed document.
This is a subtle error in understanding XML. It is simply not the case
that a non-validating parser is free to completely ignore the internal
DTD subset. Certain parts of it, specifically ATTLIST declarations
that provide defaults or non-CDATA attribute types, and internal ENTITY
declarations, *must* be processed by all conforming XML parsers.
It is quite common for people using RSS 1.0, for example, to declare a
few character entities in the internal DTD subset.
> And if it wasn't a preferred design choice, maybe there would be value in an
> entity declaration mechanism that works just as well for well-formed documents
> as for valid documents.
We already have one.
I will talk to the Core WG about adding parts of this message to the
Character Entities page.
--
[W]hen I wrote it I was more than a little John Cowan
febrile with foodpoisoning from an antique carrot jcowan@reutershealth.com
that I foolishly ate out of an illjudged faith www.ccil.org/~cowan
in the benignancy of vegetables. --And Rosta www.reutershealth.com
|
