I totally agree with this point.
I'm not into RECs all that much but surely the parse should be allowed to
occur?
I know I mentioned it before but the following illustrates how I got the
parser to do the parse anyway:
Original xml doc:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE Requests SYSTEM "Example.dtd">
<Requests>
.
.
.
Frig (start parsing from)
<Requests>
.
.
.
**The point is I did not give the parser the SYSTEM id and so as validation
was off it parsed it regardless**
I don't think I should have to program this if validation is off, but to get
it to work I had to do so.
I would like to use the parser in a fashion that says don't look for the dtd
if specified (in the SYSTEM id) as I don't want validation. I should then be
able to handle the SAX parser events - including the warning, error and
fatalerror events myself if indeed the dtd specified in the original xml doc
was required (even though validation is off).
Cheers,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter A. Volchek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 April 2001 11:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when
ValScheme=V al_Never?????
If I know exactly, that referred DTD does not contain niether any entities
not default attribute declarations (end even if it does, but it is not
important for processing xml for my suits), and I want just parse xml, not
to validate it, I should have an ability to suppress the exception to be
thrown if dtd is missing. That is related to your note ...
> ... It should be under user control as to whether such
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> things are considered fatal or not, and not all the way at the end of the
> document. There must be a way to know right then and there and tell the
> parser whether to go on.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Roddey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 1:38 AM
Subject: RE: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when ValScheme=V
al_Never?????
> They would absolutely very much want to know that, because it could
> drastically change the resulting document. If I have a complex file that
is
> made up of many documents, but I don't have a DTD and therefore cannot
> validate, then I definitely do not want the parser to just silently skip
> over any entities that it thinks weren't defined because, in my
application,
> that is a serious error. It should be under user control as to whether
such
> things are considered fatal or not, and not all the way at the end of the
> document. There must be a way to know right then and there and tell the
> parser whether to go on.
>
> --------------
> Dean Roddey
> Software Geek Extraordinaire
> Portal, Inc
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bil Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 7:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when ValScheme=V
> al_Never?????
>
>
> Hmm. I think it should only be an exception when
> validating. I can't imagine why the user of a non-
> validating processor would care if an external reference
> existed or not but maybe the parser should have some sort
> of warning flag that could be checked after a parse to
> signal that situation.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter A. Volchek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:10 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when
> ValScheme=Val_Never?????
>
>
> Absolutely agree
>
> >but it MUST NOT be an error if the file is
> >not found since a non-validating processor is NOT required
> >to read the external sub-set.
>
> Lets say, it must not be a critical error, in other words, one should be
> able to catch exception and continue parsing.
> Sometimes it is desirable to know that dtd is missing.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bil Mason
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:00 PM
> Subject: RE: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when
> ValScheme=Val_Never?????
>
>
> Actually, I don't think it's quite that simple. A non-
> validating parser is NOT required to read the external
> subset at all. Unfortunately, the 1.0 spec. doesn't say it
> MUST not, only that "Non-validating processors are required
> to check only the document entity, including the entire
> internal DTD subset, for well-formedness." (REC-xml-20001006
> 5.1, para. 4) The problem seems to be that processors are
> allowed to read external declarations, but they can NOT use
> them to modify the internal sub-set.
>
> At any rate, Chris said "... when I parse an xml doc that
> specifies a dtd ...". It sounds to me like he might have
> meant he has a document that has a line like this:
>
> <!DOCTYPE foo SYSTEM "foo.dtd">
>
> A non-validating processor is apparently allowed to attempt
> to read foo.dtd, but it MUST NOT be an error if the file is
> not found since a non-validating processor is NOT required
> to read the external sub-set.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Rydgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 7:07 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when
> ValScheme=Val_Never?????
>
>
> Yes that is the correct behaviour.
> The DTD can contain definitions that are needed even when not validating.
>
> / Erik Rydgren
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prior, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: den 26 april 2001 13:00
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when
> ValScheme=Val_Never?????
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am using the SAX parser and setting validation to Val_Never, yet when I
> parse an xml doc that specifies a dtd the parser fails if it cannot find
the
> dtd!!!
>
> Why is this the case when I am not interested in validating? Surely
looking
> for the dtd when no validation is required is not correct?
>
> Please help!
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ======================= Confidentiality Statement =======================
> The information contained in this message and any attachments is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
> addressed, and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL
> and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received
> this message in error, you are prohibited from copying, distributing, or
> using the information. Please contact the sender immediately by return
> e-mail and delete the original message from your system.
> ===================== End Confidentiality Statement =====================
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________
Email Disclaimer
This communication is for the attention of the
named recipient only and should not be passed
on to any other person. Information relating to
any company or security, is for information
purposes only and should not be interpreted as
a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security.
The information on which this communication is based
has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable,
but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change
without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments,
are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes.
___________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
