[...]
>Not necessarily. A level-one DOM does not require that much, and we
>could elect not to deliver certain information (like comments). I am
>not suggesting that we deliver the information required for the
>XML-specific DTD nodes.
>
>If we omit comments, then SAX-J would have to return only the
I would strongly support omitting comments from SAX-J, if only to prevent
them being used for carrying inappropriate information :-)
>following information:
>
>- elements
>- attributes
>- PIs
>- texts
I am very happy to settle for these.
>
>This should be sufficient for building a useful DOM. Strictly by the
>book, we specify whether each attribute was specified or defaulted,
This presumably requires an ATTLIST for the appropriate element (but does
not require a validating parser.) The (only) difficulty is deciding on the
conventions/terminology to be used. if we can agree on this it would be a
useful step forward.
>and we should specify which text is ignorable whitespace.
This seems to me to require a validating parser, or at least an algorithm
which maps contentDecl onto content. Without this I can't see how you can
decide whether inter-element whitespace is declared PCDATA (in the
contentDecl) or ignorable.
P.
Peter Murray-Rust, Director Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, domestic
net connection
VSMS http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/vsms, Virtual Hyperglossary
http://www.venus.co.uk/vhg