W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > October 2001

RE: Issue 4 Proposed Resolution (was: why no doc type declarati on and PIs in SOAP)

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 10:56:28 -0400
To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6FAAEC88.0ADB465D-ON85256AD8.0052CA75@lotus.com>
Mike Chapmion writes:

>> and there is no XML mechanism to say "you cannot
>> put a DTD or PI in an instance for this application.

I respectfully disagree.  The specification for any XML application can 
tell you what its vocabulary supports.   If my vocabulary doesn't use 
attributes, are you telling me I have to accept attributes?  Surely there 
is some taste involved.   I would strongly discourage, for example, an 
application supporting:

        <A>
        </A>

but not

        <A/>.

Certainly the infoset makes clear that these are syntactic sugar for the 
same thing.  I don't think that's true of the presence of DTD's.  Like 
attributes, it's a feature of XML that should be visible to an application 
or tool that cares, IMO.   So, while XML itself surely won't reject the 
DTD, I see no reason why the specification for an application of XML, such 
as SOAP,  can't say "fault at my level when you see one."  Why is that any 
different than saying:  "fault when the value of this attribute is >100". 
XML surely allows that, but your application doesn't have to.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 14:57:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT