> It seems to make sense, yet I have a bit of trouble thinking a document is
> not well-formed when it can become well-formed just by removing the xml
> declaration. I remember we had some long threads on this months ago (or
was
> it last year?) but I do not remember any well-accepted solution emerging.
> Guess it is time again.
>
> How about if
>
> 1) A 1.1 parser could optionally have a 1.0 mode, and
> 2) There were programmatic means to query whether it supported 1,0, and if
> it did,
> 3) The parse mode could be set programmatically, and maybe
> 4) Such a parser failing on a document could optionally (under program
> control) switch modes and try again. This last could be a recommended
> design practice, rather than a requirement.
This makes a great deal of sense to me. I am not having an issue with 1.1
parsers that can parse 1.0 documents (they simply support two versions). I
have a problem with 1.0 parsers that parse 1.1 documents by chance. I agree
with Elliotte Rusty Harold that if a document is compatabile in both
(especially if it is designed with that intent) it should be labeled 1.0--
if that is the effect the author wishes to achieve.
All the best,
Jeff Rafter
Defined Systems
http://www.defined.net
XML Development and Developer Web Hosting
