- From: Eve L. Maler <elm@arbortext.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 12:57:32 -0400
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
The XML-Lang spec calls the parsing thingie an "XML processor." And there are two kinds: nonvalidating and validating. Are these unclear with respect to classic CS terminology? Eve At 10:09 PM 5/23/97 EDT, lee@sq.com wrote: >Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com> wrote: >[...] >> [Andrew Layman] This is the key question here. It is not the XML >> parser's job to detect namespaces. Applications that care will break out >> the namespace part of the name, and look for a matching namespace >> element. This could be a standard support routine shipped with parsers, >> but is not--strictly speaking--a parser's job. Similarly, I do not see >> validation as part of a parser's job, but as something that is (at least >> logically) layered on. > >In the SGML world, the word "parser" does not mean "parser" as used >elsewhere in the field of computing. It has a special, SGML meaning. >An SGML parser does indeed do validation. > >Whether an XML parser (in the usual sense of the word parser) should do >validation is another matter entirely. > >I agree with you that namespace checking doesn't belong in a (CS) parser. >It's part of the semantics layer, if you will. But I wouldn't expect a >CS parser to check that an element had been declared either -- that would >be done in a separate module/class/layer. > >In this mailing list at least, the word "parser" is generally taken in >the SGML sense, although I would agree that it isn't clear. > >Would it help if the XML spec used different terminology? >E.g. the XML Input Reader and the XML Input Checker, or something?? >(an SGML/XML parser contains both of these) > >Lee > > >
Received on Saturday, 24 May 1997 15:44:01 UTC