Equivalence is not defined in the XML recommendation.
In the context of the wider XML eco-system, one can say that two XML documents are equivalent if they have the same infoset.
These two examples do have the same infoset.
Michael Kay
Saxonica
> On 5 Feb 2022, at 19:39, Roger L Costello <> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> By definition these two forms are equivalent:
>
> <A></A>
> <A/>
>
> Suppose a parser processes the first form and produces, among other things, a series of pairs (token kind, token value). Upon encountering this:
>
> <A>
>
> the parser produces:
>
> (START_TAG_NAME, "A")
>
> Upon encountering this:
>
> </A>
>
> the parser produces:
>
> (END_TAG_NAME, "A")
>
> Should this:
>
> <A/>
>
> result in the parser producing the same two pairs?
>
> What does "equivalent" mean?
>
> Assertion: "equivalent" means both forms result in the parser producing the same two pairs:
>
> (START_TAG_NAME, "A")
> (END_TAG_NAME, "A")
>
> Do you agree?
>
> /Roger
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe:
> subscribe:
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
