Streaming XML (Was RE: XML Information Set Requirements, W3C
cowan at locke.ccil.org
Mon Feb 22 15:33:42 GMT 1999
Mark Birbeck wrote:
> No-one so far in the discussion has argued that this is good XML -
I so argue. It is well-formed, though not valid, XML. Validity
inherently can't be checked until you've processed everything.
It might be interesting to define the subset of validity that can
be checked on the fly, though.
My first cut at it says that all VCs except the following can be
checked given the full left context (in stream terms, all that
has come before):
 Standalone Document Declaration
 Entity Name (detectable at end of DTD)
 Notation Attributes (detectable at end of DTD)
Have I overlooked anything?
> My contribution to the discussion - which I *did* give much thought -
> was to try and argue that it is not very good programming practice
> anyway, to open a stream for 8 hours.
I agree with this.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev