[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 9:11 AM -0500 3/5/04, David Megginson wrote:
>* 2004-0005: endDocument
>
>- note that a parser might not invoke endDocument after reporting a
> fatal error (this produces the fewest incompatibilities)
I'm a little uncomfortable with this "fix". I think always calling
endDocument is the right thing to do, and it should be required in
the spec. I don't think this would increase incompatibility in any
significant way. It would simply encourage vendors of non-conformant
parsers to bring their parsers into compliance, thereby increasing
compatibility. This would allow users to depend on this behavior for
the first time.
I don't think a parser suddenly changing from not calling endDocument
to calling endDocument is likely to cause major problems. Fixing
this in the direction you propose would simply bake in the existing
incompatibility. One way or the other, this should be nailed down.
Either parser all parsers should call endDocument after a
well-formedness error or none should. Letting it go either way is the
real problem.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
|
