Re: [xml-dev] Re: interpreting W3C C14N Rec.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Henry S. Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
I'll bite. I think it's that you can get away with invalid values of
ID-declared attributes if you stick with a conservative
well-formed-enforcement only parser. The doc. is saying it's on
balance a bad idea to take advantage of this.
In part, I presume, because many XML parsers actually fall into the
useful category acknowledged by the spec, i.e. not validating, but do
read the doctype, in which case they _must_ mark the types of
attributes. This leads to a borderline contradictory situation with,
for example, as simple a case as <a id="3b"/>.
+1
GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine at http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures