- From: Dieter Köhler <d.k@philo.de>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 00:11:25 +0200
- To: xml-editor@w3.org
There seem to exist several inconsistancies with regard to Prod. [68] WFC: Entity Declared and the VC: Entity Declared. 1) Prod. [32] VC: Standalone Document Declaration implies that it is a VC if standalone="yes" and entity references (other than to amp, lt, qt, apos, quot) appear in the document which are defined in the external DTD subset, but prod. [68] WFC: Entity Declared implies that it is a WFC instead. 2) Prod. [68] VC: Entity Declared starts: "In a document with an external subset or external parameter entities ..." The term "external parameter entities" is ambiguous, because it can either refer to PE references or PE declarations. Shouldn't it read: "... or references to external parameter entities ..."? 3) The second paragraph of the Prod. [68] WFC: Entity Declared says: "Note that non-validating processors are not obligated to read and process entity declarations occuring in parameter entities or in the external subset; for such documents, the rule that an entity must be declared is a well-formedness constraint only if standalone='yes'. Does this mean that if standalone="no", a missing declaration is always a VC or only if a non-validating processor is used? If it is always a VC the start of the VC: Entity Declared can be changed to "In a document with "standalone='no'", the Name ...". If it depends on the type of the processor used, for clearity the words "for such documents" should in my opinion be replaced by "when a non-validating processor is used on such documents". Dieter Köhler Institute of Philosophy and Centre for Multimedia Studies University of Karlsruhe Germany
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2005 22:12:25 UTC