W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > May to June 2001

Re: FPI Mythology (was: XHTML Considered Harmful)

From: William F. Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:01:53 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200106281301.f5SD1ra07862@pluto.math.albany.edu>
To: www-talk@w3.org
Arjun Ray <aray@q2.net> writes:

> > (Arjun: were you seriously suggesting that a given FPI used in a
> > document type declaration to refer to an external document type
> > definition, with, for the sake of discussion, no internal subset,
> > can be used with more than one SGML declaration?)
> 
> Yes.  There's nothing unusual in that.  All that matters is whether
> the markup declarations constituting the contents of the external
> entity are intelligible given the provisions (roughly, the SCOPE,
> SYNTAX and FEATURES sections) of any specific SGML declaration.

My question could have been more specifically worded in stipulating
the form of document type declaration construction permitted in HTML
documents.  I agree that parsing limits are not important.

If a late version of HTML has a larger charset than an early version,
then it is formally wrong to allow the larger charset in something
specified as the early version.

Each of the IETF/W3C specifications of HTML beginning with version 2.0
(RFC 1866) has specified a particular SGML declaration and has
specified a particular form of document type declaration construction
using one of a small list of FPI's.  Internal declaration subsets are
not allowed, and system identifiers are not allowed.

With these conditions the unified validation scheme that I described
is fine.

                                    -- Bill
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2001 09:02:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:26 GMT