Re: RELAXED CHEKING feature [Re: conformance testing....]

Stefan Haustein wrote:

>Well perhaps this is a bit misleading... I am using the relaxed setting 
>to allow HTML parsing... Perhaps we can simply make the distinction 
>based on the class name for now---or use an additional r/o-flag, where 
>the parser identifies itself in the way you described?
>
how this identification would be obtained?

> If relaxed is 
>set, I even try to accept SGML things like <table border=1> etc.
>  
>
that is more than i thought about as it is both subset and superset of 
XML ...

alek

>
>Aleksander Slominski wrote:
>  
>
>>Stefan Haustein wrote:
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>so if http://xmlpull.org/v1/doc/features.html#relaxed is supported those 
>>>>errors will be not fatal and just reported as violations?
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>>>Yes, that would be great.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>hi,
>>
>>i was thinking about it and would like to add to description of this 
>>feature it additional clarifications:
>>
>>
>>"Even when this feature is enabled parser MUST accepts all valid XML 
>>(the only exception is in case when PROCESS DOCDECL is disabled as in 
>>this case DOCDECL is not parsed). This feature is intended to indicate 
>>that the parser will make less effort to detect invalid XML documents. 
>>This is good to produce small footprint XML parsers for J2ME such as kXML2".
>>
>>i was also thinking that to indicate intent of this feature (all _valid_ 
>>XML accepted but invalid may not be detected) we should change name to 
>>"relaxed-checking"?
>>
>>thanks,
>>
>>alek
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>  
>


-- 
The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xmlpull-dev/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/