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

Issue anderson-1

From: james anderson <james.anderson@setf.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:23:44 +0200
Message-ID: <3B5C79AD.D378958A@setf.de>
To: www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org

please record my objection as a majority opinion.

i grant that my experience with non-validating processors is strictly
vicarious, but i understand the note on the interpretation of
wellformedness constraints by non-validating processors to permit the
presence of an unexpanded internal entity in a wellformed document under
some conditions:

"Note that if entities are declared in the external subset or in
external parameter entities, a non-validating processor is not obligated
to read and process their declarations; for such documents, the rule
that an entity must be declared is a well-formedness constraint only if standalone='yes'."

which i would have taken to mean that the infoset must include a means
to describe unexpanded internal entity references in keeping with
requirement 3.3.  given which, a means to describe the respective
declaration follows in order to keep the description closed from the
standpoint of generation for validating processors.

www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org wrote:
> ...
> Issue anderson-1
> Status: rejected
> Origin: james.anderson@setf.de: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-infoset-comments/2001AprJun/0039.html
> Doesn't like the way entities have been restricted
> The question of whether to represent parsed entities was the subject
> of much discussion at the last-call stage. We decided that they were
> not required by most of the Infoset's client specs, with the DOM being
> the clear exception.
> This decision was indeed counter to design principle 2.2 of the
> requirements document in that editors may require this information,
> but it had become apparent that this requirement was beyond what the
> Infoset could reasonably provide. Editors may require information such
> as attribute order, whitespace in tags and variety of quotes used that
> we had already considered to be too low-level for the Infoset, so we
> did not consider that their need for entity boundaries was compelling.
> We do not agree that this decision violates requirements 3.3 and 3.4.
> The case of unparsed entities is different; they are part of the
> logical content of the document and the XML specification requires
> that they are reported.
> The Infoset does allow for processors that do not expand external
> parsed entities, by means of the Unexpanded Entity Reference
> information item. Though there is no separate representation of the
> entity, all the relevant information is provided.
> ...
Received on Monday, 23 July 2001 15:19:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:51 UTC