From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tab@snarc.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1205ABBAF
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:38:47 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAMWw0UjUVZsV/2dsb2JhbAC5ZIFn
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,420,1217800800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="29316572"
Received: from cerberus.snarc.org ([212.85.155.21])
  by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2008 10:38:41 +0200
Received: by cerberus.snarc.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id D623E129EC; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:38:53 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:38:53 +0100
From: Vincent Hanquez <tab@snarc.org>
To: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com>
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] XML library for validating MathML
Message-ID: <20080918083853.GA15219@snarc.org>
References: <103293.54569.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <103293.54569.qm@web54606.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
X-Warning: Email may contain unsmilyfied humor and/or satire.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-Spam: no; 0.00; dtds:01 subset:01 pxp:01 1.0:98 ffff:98 char:01 wrote:01 parsing:01 caml-list:01 expression:02 expression:02 parse:02 supported:02 string:02 library:03 

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:58:05AM -0700, Dario Teixeira wrote:
> Given a string containing a mathematical expression in the MathML
> markup, I need to verify that the expression is indeed valid MathML.
> I am therefore looking for an XML library that can verify an expression
> against a given DTD.
> 
> Now, I have tried Xml-light, and the code I used is listed below.
> Unfortunately, it fails when trying to parse MathML's DTD (it's the
> standard DTD from the W3C).  I have tried simpler DTDs, and it does work
> with them; am I therefore correct in assuming that Xml-light can only
> handle a particular version/subset of DTD features?

I don't know about validation (i'll probably suggest looking at PXP tho),
but xml-light is very bad for XML compliance. the library is (happily) parsing
XML files that it shouldn't, which tell a lots concerning its validation
abilities ...

for example, the XML supported character range is not even checked:

Xml 1.0 specification -- 2.2 Characters

Char	   ::=   	#x9 | #xA | #xD | [#x20-#xD7FF] |
		[#xE000-#xFFFD] | [#x10000-#x10FFFF]

others problems include (uncomplete list):
- complete unicode un-awareness
- funny & wrong entities handling

-- 
Vincent