- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:30:00 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Norman Walsh writes:
> I suggest we replace the first paragraph of 2.2 with:
I'm happy with these words, but I think we need to add a bit more in
two respects:
1) Put an obligation on implementations to document -- somthing along
the lines of
Except for cases which are specifically called out in [section 7],
the extent to which namespace fixup and checks for outputs which
cannot be serialized into well-formed XML documents are performed on
intermediate outputs is *implementation-defined*.
2) Clarify that serialization *must* produce well-formed documents.
Somewhere, possibly in 2.2, we need to say something along the lines
of
Whenever an implementation serializes pipeline contents, for example
for pipeline outputs, or as part of steps such as p:store or
p:http-request, it is a *dynamic error* if that serialization cannot
be done so as to produce a well-formed XML document.
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG3c5bkjnJixAXWBoRAvcVAJ9tOpJ0AZr+wO/ASQtwZZsquIfTFACbBOkv
JwH3cADd4R4+MVTwnC8mOx8=
=Xq35
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2007 21:30:34 UTC