RE: Test cases requiring DTD processing

I agree, I think this is a good addition to the feature dependencies. I wonder if we can be more explicit about this in the spec? Though I always thought that DTD processing is optional, except for some parts (like entities?).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@saxonica.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 11:37 AM
> To: Public XSLWG
> Subject: Test cases requiring DTD processing
> 
> As those of you who were at XML Prague will know, we're currently working
> on an XSLT implementation where stylesheet compilation happens on the
> server, but execution happens in the browser. This is therefore dependent
> on the XML parsers provided by the browser vendors, and these notoriously
> have very weak DTD support.
> 
> I'm proposing to mark those tests that require DTD support (e.g.
> identification of ID attributes, expansion of fixed/default attribute values,
> notification of unparsed entities) with the dependency <feature
> value="dtd"/>.
> 
> There is wriggle-room in the spec here: we explicitly say that processors are
> allowed to construct the source tree from XML using algorithms different
> from the "construction from an Infoset" process described in the XDM
> specification.
> 
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica

Received on Monday, 14 March 2016 23:22:48 UTC