Re WF, V, and MSXML

[Terry Allen]

Peter Murray-Rust wrote re me:
| > Point taken; but the spec is not entirely clean on this point.  If the
| > application requests the processor to process, the processor must
| > inform the application of certain things.  And it is hard to get
| > around
| > 
| > "*An XML processor which does not read the DTD must always pass all 
| > characters in a document that are not markup through to the application.* 
| 
| Ah!  I had assumed the internal subset as 'markup' - you see it as part
| of the document.  We need a ruling on this :-).  Obviously if the DTD appears
| ***in the processed document***, then it could be interpreted as having been
| read and used for validation.

No, I agree it's markup; the quote is meant to establish the point that
the spec does talk about the processor sending stuff (output) to the
application (in response to your statement that the spec was neutral
on this issue).

Tim Bray asked, without specific context:
| 
| The fact that this debate can exist is kind of puzzling to me.  Check
| out section 5, "Conformance".  A processor can either be validating
| or non-validating.  At no point in the spec does anything say or suggest
| that whether or not the processor validates has anything to do with
| what is in the document being processed.  I haven't looked at MSXML
| closely, but NXP's behavior is obviously correct in this respect - 
| it validates or not at user request.
| 
| What am I missing? -Tim

Clarity in writing.  If a processor is nonvalidating, must it examine
the document for WFness?  may it?  may it not?

I understood (part of) what Peter and I were discussing to be whether and 
what the XMLlang spec requires a processor to send to an application, and
under what conditions.

MSXML sends a munged version of the infernal subset, which I first
thought must be required by the spec.  I now see it doesn't.  We
also pondered whether a processor that is nonvalidating must examine 
for WFness (a) the internal subset and, or, (b) the external subset.
I am pretty sure that (a) is required, but don't know about (b).
The spec speaks of processors that don't "read the DTD", yet the
internal subset is part of the DTD and apparently must "match" the
prolog production.  

I suggest that all passages mentioning "processors" and "DTDs" be
reviewed for consistency.  
 


Regards,
  Terry Allen    Electronic Publishing Consultant    tallen[at]sonic.net
                   http://www.sonic.net/~tallen/
    Davenport and DocBook:  http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html
          T.A. at Passage Systems:  terry.allen[at]passage.com 


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa at ic.ac.uk)