W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > March 2002

Re: XHTML and #fixed attributes

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 02:29:52 +0100
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20020322023337-r01050000-D5165B72-3D34-11D6-B4B1-00039300CF5C-1013-010c@192.168.1.7>
Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@niksula.hut.fi> wrote:

>On Wednesday, March 20, 2002, at 04:43 , Jim Correia wrote:
>
>>This means that the attribute (xmlns for example) may be omitted (and
>>if it does, it will pick up the default fixed value)
>
>Only when the document is parsed by a parser that reads external
>entities. Relying on anything (attribute defaults, character entities)
>declared in an external DTD subset will cause problems when the document
>is processed by a non-validating XML system that doesn't read external
>entities.

You are both including generic XML considerations (Valid vs. Well-Formed
distinction) and omitting standard XML practice here (assuming an External
Subset). The DTD in this case may well exist in an Internal Subset -- in
which case whether the XML Processor is Validating or not is irrelevant --
or the Document Instance is an XHTML document which is either not "parsed"
or it is parsed by a Validating XML Processor -- in which case whether the
XML Processor is Validating or not is irrelevant.

No?


Not disagreeing with you or trying to be pedantic, but you phrased that
somewhat oddly and I wonder if that's just long experience dealing with
hobbyist XML authors or if it's something I've misunderstood (XML really
isn't my forté).


-- 
I have to admit that I'm hoping the current situation with regard to XML
Namespaces and W3C XML Schemas is a giant practical joke,   but I see no
signs of pranksters coming forward with a gleeful smile to announce that
they were just kidding.                              -- Simon St.Laurent
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 20:40:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:01 GMT