W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > April 1997

Re: Error handling: yes, I did mean it

From: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 20:45:21 -0400
Message-ID: <336544A1.D29867C0@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
To: Michael Sperberg-McQueen <U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
CC: W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
Michael Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
> If this is true, then what we need to do is to ensure that XML
> processors *always* allow the user to request error reports, even if the
> software recovers from the errors in question.  That way, the user who
> says "program X displays my data all right, why don't you?" can be told
> "look, even program X says your document is ill-formed: look at it with
> error-checking turned on!"
> As it happens, the xml-lang spec already requires this.  I don't think
> it can realistically or usefully require more, except perhaps that it
> should also explicitly require that the processor notify any down-stream
> app, as well as the 'end' user if any.  I don't think it should require
> less.

Note also that the more Draconian we are, the more vendors are likely to
look around for excuses like "it isn't an XML processor" or worse yet,
just ignore the spec entirely. There is a non-Draconian solution to the
problem and it stands a reasonable chance of implementation. Let's not
"push it."

 Paul Prescod
Received on Monday, 28 April 1997 22:13:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:25 UTC