Parser compliance

Richard Lanyon rgl at
Wed Nov 17 09:40:35 GMT 1999

On 16 Nov 1999, David Megginson wrote:
> Sean Mc Grath <digitome at> writes:

> > Does anyone knowledgeable in the minutia of XML compliance care to
> > list the extant parsers and put them into fully XML 1.0 compliant
> > and non-XML 1.0 compliant camps?

> Well, Expat is drop-dead, shoot-your-dog-if-it-ain't conformant...

Indeed, but it's not necessarily "fully-featured" in that it doesn't
include external entities and isn't validating, which is why we didn't
use it. One parser which does do these things is LT XML, but that isn't
very fussy about badly-formed XML (for a start, it doesn't reject
documents with more than one top-level element). So now we're onto

Anyway, the point is that the issue of different XML document layouts for
different parsers is not merely one of conformance, but of the number of
optional features as well (something particularly telling in the light of
the cut-down XML debate currently continuing on this list).

Richard Lanyon (Software Engineer) |     "The medium is the message"
XML Script development,            |             - Marshall McLuhan
DecisionSoft Ltd.                  |

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list