xml:base
, XML Namespaces and XLink could also be considered as “modules” for XML even though they have not been formally defined as such.
SVG 1.1 [SVG11] has roughly four classes of products (markup fragments with various extents, generators, interpreters and viewers). Some of these classes of products have various degrees of conformance (Appendix G: Conformance Criteria [SVG11]), e.g., static / dynamic for interpreters and static / dynamic for high-quality for viewers. SVG 1.1 also defines modules that are grouped into profiles (tiny/mobile/full).
rect
, there are precise examples with the markup needed to generate a rectangle, a rendering of the markup as an image to help people visualize it and a separate file with the said markup.
HTML 4.01 [HTML401]: The HTML 4.01 specification, designed in a very educative way, has some very good examples.
Normative Refer
ences. ●Use the Technical Reports Bibliography Extractor to generate the markup for a proper bibliography.
…="http://www.example.org/#foo" …="http://[3ffe:2a00:100:7031::1]/" …="http://666.666.666.666/" …="foo" …="http://www.example.org/~anaïs-nin"Precise designation and reference: The first example is illegal as the example uses a URI reference as opposed to only a URI; RFC 2396 clearly distinguishes between those constructs. To make the first example a valid construct, the text should have said: The value of the attribute is a URI reference as defined in section 4 of [RFC2396]. Superset of the reference and interpretation: RFC 2396 does not include support for IPv6 literals; RFC 2732 introduced the syntax but it does not update RFC 2396. It is not correct to assume that it does even if it seems logical. Do not interpret the intention of the external reference. As a separate example, any specification that defines the behavior of a class of products that creates XML should address XML 1.1 and anticipate future XML versions. In XSLT, creation of XML is specified by
<xsl:output metho
d="xml" version="1.0" />
, and each version of XSLT defines the allowable range of values for the version attribute. Another option is to reference the XML Infoset - for instance, XML Inclusions are compatible both with XML 1.0 and XML 1.1 since they reference normatively the XML Infoset, which is the same for the two versions of XML.
In its section Referencing the Unicode Standard
and ISO/IEC 10646, the specification Character
Model for the World Wide Web 1.0: Fundamentals
[CHARMOD] gives detailed instructions for referencing the Unicode Standard and ISO/IEC 10646. Specification editors are
encouraged to follow these recommendations.
dfn
in HTML to indicate that this is the defining instance of the enclosed term. It will be easier to create a glossary of your terms later on. For example in this document
<dfn>Conformance</dfn> is the fulfillment of a product, process, or service of specified requirements.
pr
operty is set(see discussion on this topic on the www-style@w3.org mailing list in March 2001).
<termde
f>
and <term>
markup in-line make it possible to build a glossary automatically with <glist>
.
●With XHTML, an XSLT style sheet can extract the glossary from the in-line definitions.
BasicAnimation
module but not the SplineAnimation
module. The SMIL 2.0 Basic Profile on the other hand does not require implementation of any of the animation modules.
Dependency or intertwined relationship between profiles and modules is common. The combination of XHTML 1.0 [XHTML10], SMIL 2.0 [SMIL20] and SVG 1.1 [SVG11] is an example.
QName
.
●Whether to raise an error when attempting to create an attribute after having created children of the element.
●Whether to raise an error when attempting to create an attribute on a node that is not an element.
●Whether to raise an error when the content of an attribute is not plain text.
●Whether to raise an error when two attribute-sets of the same precedence contain an attribute of the same name.
●Whether to raise an error when attempting to create an attribute directly under the root of a result tree fragment.
In each case, one prescribed behavior exists for an implementation that chooses not to raise an error. Thus, the six separate binary choices give rise to 64 different possible behaviors for conformant processors. Typically, an implementer would be content to make a more global choice about raising errors when there is an attempt to create non-well-formed XML results.
Extensions. (三)Make a table of contents entry for it. (四)Address the following Good Practices in this section.
function-available (QNam
e)
and element-available (QName)
that must be present in every implementation. These functions inform the XSLT processor that there is an extension. The XSLT processor can therefore return a value of false. The functions provide handling instructions (e.g., signal an error, perform fallback and do not signal error) if the extension is not available.
WSDL 2.0 [WSDL20] defines binding extension elements which are used to provide information specific to a particular binding. It is a two-part extensibility model based on namespace-qualified elements and attributes. It provides the syntax and semantics for signaling extensions. Extension elements can be marked as mandatory, meaning that they must be processed correctly by the WSDL processor - i.e., either agree to fully abide by all the rules and semantics signaled by the extension or immediate cease processing (fault).
An initial da
sh or underscore is guaranteed n
ever to be used in a property or
keyword by any current or futur
e level of CSS. Thus typical CSS
implementations may not recogni
ze such properties and may ignor
e them according to the rules fo
r handling parsing errors. Howev
er, because the initial dash or
underscore is part of the gramma
r, CSS2.1 implementers should al
ways be able to use a CSS-confor
ming parser, whether or not they
support any vendor-specific ext
ensions.
mustUnderstand
attribute. In this approach to error-handling, a processor encountering a syntax token not defined in the specification is required to know how to process the said token or must fail for the whole unit where the token appears.
●The “must Ignore” policy, as implemented in SOAP 1.2 by the mu
stIgnore
attribute. In this approach, a processor not knowing how to process an unknown syntax token must skip part or the totality of the unit where the token appears.
A good way to handle these two approaches is to have a way in the syntax to distinguish which behavior is expected (e.g., mustUn
derstand
/mustIgnore
attributes in SOAP 1.2). Which policy to choose depends on the importance of the
data processing, user experience with applications based on the
said format, etc.
Do not forget to address all the classes of products. For example, an authoring tool and a rendering tool might behave in different ways.
The following elements are o
bsolete:LISTING
,PLAINTEXT
, and
XMP
. For all of them, authors s
hould use the PRE
element instea
d.
Part | Status |
---|---|
Requirement | Normative required |
Good Practice | Normative optional |
What does this mean? | Informative |
Why Care? | Informative |
Techniques | Informative |
Examples | Informative |