- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:43:57 -0500
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
The XML conformance tests assume that a PI with <?XML ...?> (or Xml, XmL, etc.) is not well-formed. However, 2.6 only says "reserved for standardization", the same language used for elements and attributes beginning with the three letters. So our rec and our tests don't agree. Saxon also reports a fatal error for such PIs. I think we should make it a fatal error, so that people don't attempt to write a processing instruction using upper case which is then effectively ignored rather than provoking an error. Here are the relevant tests: xmlconf/ibm/not-wf/P17/ibm17n01.xml:<?XML This is a test ?> xmlconf/ibm/not-wf/P77/ibm77n02.ent:<?XML encoding="UTF8"?> xmlconf/ibm/not-wf/P23/ibm23n04.xml:<?XML version='1.0'?> xmlconf/oasis/p23fail1.xml:<?XML version="1.0"?> xmlconf/xmltest/not-wf/sa/154.xml:<?XML version="1.0"?> xmlconf/xmltest/not-wf/sa/156.xml:<?xMl version="1.0"?> xmlconf/ibm/not-wf/P17/ibm17n04.xml:<?xmL This is a test ?> xmlconf/xmltest/not-wf/sa/155.xml:<?xmL version="1.0"?> xmlconf/xmltest/not-wf/sa/157.xml:<?xmL?> xmlconf/ibm/not-wf/P17/ibm17n02.xml:<?xML This is a test ?> -- A few times, I did some exuberant stomping about, John Cowan like a hippo auditioning for Riverdance, though cowan@ccil.org I stopped when I thought I heard something at http://ccil.org/~cowan the far side of the room falling over in rhythm with my feet. --Joseph Zitt
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2011 22:44:24 UTC