- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 10:51:57 -0400
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
>> Oh, the sentence "since SOAP message MUST NOT >> contain DTDs in the first place then it would >> be OK for a processor to ignore one >> if present" feels a bit weird. 8-) But I think >> it can be a good enough explanation for the >> compromise. I could not make the face to face, but I disagree with the conclusion apparently reached there. I think DTD's should not be allowed, and I think conforming SOAP processors should be required to reject rather than process messages containing them. As Jacek noted or implied, processing the message while ignoring the DTD violates XML 1.0. Furthermore, it encourages unsafe processing of messages...I might have defined an entity or set an attribute default that makes the message unsafe to interpret without understanding the DTD. That's serious. Finally, it encourages interop problems, as some processors will and others won't process the message. I think this is a serious mistake for all of those reasons. IMHO, there is nothing we can or should do to prevent the occasional implementation of non-conforming processors that cheat a bit for reasons of space, but we should not condone or bless them with some implication that they are conforming after all. Conformance should prohibit processing of any message containing a DTD. What yo do when you're not conforming should be at your own risk. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 14:34:46 UTC