Re: Issue 4 Proposed Resolution (was: why no doc type declaration and PIs in SOAP)

On 01/10/01 5:04 AM, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com> wrote:

> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
>> 
>>  I'd just like to restate here that XML requires some DTD
>> processing to be done even by non-validating parsers, so ignoring
>> internal DTDs would violate XML processing rules.
>> 
> I raised this point at the F2F when defending my original proposal[1]
> that processors MUST generate a fault on receipt of a message containing
> a DTD or PI. However it was felt that since SOAP message MUST NOT
> contain DTDs in the first place then it would be OK for a processor to
> ignore one if present. As stated in a prior message, this was to allow
> very simple processors (that presumably are without a full parser) to
> ignore DTDs and PI rather than be forced to include checks for their
> (erroneous) presence.
> 
> Regards,
> Marc.
> 

[Marc, I think I sent this only to you not the whole list as I intended.]

So we are talking about accommodating very simple XML processor here. One
that cannot recognise a DTD or a PI, yet that is smart enough to know how to
skip over them. Does such a parser exist?

Just wondering.

Cheers,
Bob

Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 17:24:23 UTC