W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

CR-xml-infoset-20010514: 2.1. The Document Information Item

From: james anderson <james.anderson@setf.de>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:03:49 +0200
Message-ID: <3B010CE8.A16FEE04@setf.de>
To: www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org

2.1. The Document Information Item

- [entities] has been restricted to [unparsed entities]:
  counter to principle 2.2
  violates requirements 3.3, 3.4

this makes it difficult to describe a document which has unexpanded
entity references. while one can understand that the infset give
preference to the logical document structure, it does not follow that it
inconsistently neglect descriptions of the physical structure. once the
infoset has elevated unexpanded entities from "physical" to "logical"
status, it is surprising that it does not recognize other entity forms
as well.

independent of whether a DTD must be read, shouldn't it be possible to
more completely describe a document which contains unexpanded
references? why, for example, does the infoset not admit entity
information items which were "missing". 

in passing, where the infoset does not describe expanded entity
references, the designation "unexpanded" is redundant.

what have i overlooked here?
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2001 06:59:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:50 UTC