Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030605115642.02794ba8@leverageweb.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 11:57:42 -0400
To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
From: Geoff Howard <cocoon@leverageweb.com>
Subject: Re: Unusual behaviour with <xsp-uti:include-uri/>
In-Reply-To: <83wug0ed56.fsf@bog.darkzone.fiz-chemie.de>
References: <A75B2A4B8715D611890B0020482D03D603B0FE4D@cimexc01.ecb.de>
 <3EDF5FE4.3090608@apache.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 11:51 AM 6/5/2003, you wrote:
>Berin Loritsch <bloritsch@apache.org> writes:
>
> > You are probably the victim of an XML parser getting more strict with
> > the XML spec.
> >
> > Having comments outside the root element of a document is _not_ well
> > formed, and any XML parser is free to reject that.  If you move those
> > comments INSIDE the root element, you should also lose the exceptions.
>
>Is this true? The production rules for XML 1.0 (second edition) say:
>
>[1]     document           ::=          prolog element Misc*
>                                                ^^
>                                   This is  the root element.
>[22]            prolog     ::=          XMLDecl? Misc* (doctypedecl Misc*)?
>[27]            Misc       ::=          Comment | PI | S
>
>No comments are allowed before the XML declaration, but they are allowed
>directly behind it and before the beginning of the root element.
>Otherwise 90% of my XML documents would be invalid.

I wonder if this happens when the xml declaration is missing?

Geoff