The parser should conform to xml rec. No one argues with this statement.
In its "default" state it raises fatal error if dtd is missing. That is
great.
But, why not provide the (let name it advanced api ) additional feature,
which allows to suppress it? (especially, when so many people require it).
At least, it may be put in the protected area of a parser, so that it might
be used, only by those people who really knows what they are required.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason E. Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 7:35 AM
Subject: Re: PLEASE HELP: SAX parser errors on validation when ValScheme=V
al_Never?????
> It seems that this discussion is one best addressed by the XML spec
> community and not here. The real question is should a non-validating
> parse raise a fatal error if it cannot locate the DTD specified in the
> DOCTYPE? Currently, this seems to be an implementation issue. Xerces
> does it one way and other parsers handle it a different way.
>
> We can rant and rave all we want, but really it's up to them.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
