- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 17:07:49 -0500
- To: W3C XML-ER Community Group <public-xml-er@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <m2ehtnhmbu.fsf@nwalsh.com>
David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> writes: > On 21/02/2012 18:40, Liam R E Quin wrote: >> Right; fetching a DTD is the only plausible way to recover from >> undefined entities, for example. > > There are other recovery strategies that are plausible though. > HTML for example expands the ones it knows about and for others it's a > parse error but the & is put back as character data. > > This would possibly be a reasonable strategy for xml-er as well, > especially if, as suggested by others, the html5/mathml entity sets were > pre-defined. I'm in favor of predefining all the html5/mathml entities. And presented with "&flubber;", where no definition of the flubber entity is known (for whatever reason, TBD), I think "&flubber;" is about the best recovery we could hope for. Though I suppose it's worth thinking outside the box. In an element context <er:ent>flubber</er:ent> would be another possibility. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh Lead Engineer MarkLogic Corporation Phone: +1 413 624 6676 www.marklogic.com
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 22:08:17 UTC