- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 17:34:49 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2441 ------- Comment #24 from maxim.orgiyan@oracle.com 2006-09-29 17:34 ------- (In reply to comment #20) > (In reply to comment #18) > > > Given these descriptions, one possible algorithm, for example, is to process a > > string > > by first applying all entity ref replacements, and then all the character > > reference replacements on the resulting string. Which is what at least > > one processors I tried appears to do. > > > The spec does not explictly say that algorithm is not used, but it can not list > all possible non-used algorithm. if such double parsing were to be used the > string "&" would, like the string "&" be a syntax error (unterminated > reference, element content of <a/> would generate an element node, etc. > There is no way that the spec can be interepreted in that way. > > David >>> Not necessarily. I think you're assuming the >>> XQuery rules would apply after the second pass of such algorithm, >>> but that doesn't have to be the case. >>> >>> I am not asking XQuery to like all possible non-used algorithm. >>> It could, very easily and precisely, however, give the *one* >>> algorithm to be used. Which would eliminate potential ambiguities. >
Received on Friday, 29 September 2006 17:34:56 UTC