W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2007

RE: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> elements

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:45:42 -0700
Message-ID: <BEBB9CBE66B372469E93FFDE3EDC493E4131A4@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org>
Cc: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>

I'm not sure what "replace by content" means in this context. If it's an
XML element that isn't thrown away from the infoset, is it really

I have a feeling that the usage of Ignore that we've had for the past
decade or so really means "ignore for the purposes of validation", that
is don't break.  Perhaps a better phrasing that "Must Ignore Unknowns"
is "Must not fault on Unknowns".  Outside of the validation, there are a
wide variety of ways that the so-called extra content is handled.  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 2:05 PM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com; Tim Berners-Lee; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> elements
> David Orchard scripsit:
> > I agree that the definition of "ignore" needs elaboration.  I think 
> > there are at least 2 major flavours: ignore and delete, and 
> ignore and 
> > retain.
> Or to put it another way:  delete, and replace by content.
> -- 
> John Cowan    http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan@ccil.org
> SAXParserFactory [is] a hideous, evil monstrosity of a class 
> that should be hung, shot, beheaded, drawn and quartered, 
> burned at the stake, buried in unconsecrated ground, dug up, 
> cremated, and the ashes tossed in the Tiber while the 
> complete cast of Wicked sings "Ding dong, the witch is dead." 
>  --Elliotte Rusty Harold on xml-dev
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 21:47:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:52 UTC