- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@allette.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 15:43:08 +1000
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Tim Bray wrote: > > To summarize: I proposed that XML processors be required to stop > passing data (other than error notifications) to applications after the > first violation of well-formedness. Lots of people disagree. As long as there is no intent to include invalidity onto the list of things that a client must freak out at. As far as well-formedness, an error is an error and should be reported. But it should be up to the particular vendor to figure out what strategy to take in the presence of a error. We cannot assume that all XML documents are financial transactions that do require stringent error checking. For example, (due to the evil "selective ack" design problem in TCP/IP) large documents have a high chance of failing in transfers to faraway places like here (Australia). So we would would probably look more dimly on higher-layer protocols compounding the problem by not even making available as much as you managed to get. Certainly for this applies to readable documents. -Rick Jelliffe
Received on Monday, 21 April 1997 01:37:41 UTC