- From: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 17:15:16 +0100 (BST)
- To: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson), Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Daniel Veillard <veillard@redhat.com>
- Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> 1) In the spirit of trying to provide a deterministic answer to the > "What infoset do you get" question wrt our profiles, what should > we say wrt [element content whitespace], i.e. must be absent, must > be present and accurate? I haven't looked at this in a long time. As I remember it, whether text is element content whitespace is a fact about the document independent of the processor, but non-validating processors are not required to determine it. A processor that does not determine it should set the character's [element content whitespace] property to "unknown", and set the [all declarations processed] property of the document to false. > 2) Does RXP/xmlproc provide e-c-w information when it's not > validating but there is a doctype? RXP doesn't. It sets pcdata_ignorable_whitespace to false if the Validate flag is not set. > 4) Or, do you think the above analysis is wrong and it's actually an > error for a processor which isn't validating to supply e-c-w > information? I don't think there's any spec that says it's an error for a processor to return unnecessary information! -- Richard -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Tuesday, 1 June 2010 16:16:04 UTC