Please refer to the errata for this document, which may include some normative corrections.
This document is also available in these non-normative formats: XML and XHTML with color-coded revision indicators.
See also translations.
Copyright © 2003 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply.
The Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a subset of SGML that is completely described in this document. Its goal is to enable generic SGML to be served, received, and processed on the Web in the way that is now possible with HTML. XML has been designed for ease of implementation and for interoperability with both SGML and HTML.
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
This document is a Proposed Recommendation of the W3C. This document is based on the feedback from implementers on the XML 1.0 Candidate Recommendation dated 15 October 2002, and the XML Core Working Group believes that the specification is now stable and ready for the Advisory Committee review.
Publication as a Proposed Recommendation does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
W3C Advisory Committee Representatives are invited to submit their formal review per the instructions in the Call for Review. The public is also invited to send comments to xml-editor@w3.org (public archives are available). The review period extends to 5 December 2003. Reviewers are encouraged to read the XHTML with color-coded revision indicators; this version highlights each substantive change separating XML 1.1 from XML 1.0.
This document specifies a syntax created by subsetting an existing, widely used international text processing standard (Standard Generalized Markup Language, ISO 8879:1986(E) as amended and corrected) for use on the World Wide Web. It is a product of the W3C XML Activity. The English version of this specification is the only normative version. However, for translations of this document, see http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byTechnology?technology=xml11. A list of current W3C Recommendations and other technical documents can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR.
Documentation of intellectual property possibly relevant to this recommendation may be found at the Working Group's public IPR disclosure page.
An implementation report for XML 1.1 is available at http://www.w3.org/XML/2002/09/xml11-implementation.html.
Please report errors in this document to xml-editor@w3.org; archives are available. The errata list for this third edition is available at http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V11-1e-errata.
A Test Suite is maintained to help assessing conformance to this specification.
Note:
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen's affiliation has changed since the publication of the first edition of XML 1.0. He is now at the World Wide Web Consortium, and can be contacted at cmsmcq@w3.org.
1 Introduction
1.1 Origin
and Goals
1.2 Terminology
1.3 Rationale for
XML 1.1
2 Documents
2.1 Well-Formed XML Documents
2.2 Characters
2.3 Common
Syntactic Constructs
2.4 Character Data
and Markup
2.5 Comments
2.6 Processing
Instructions
2.7 CDATA
Sections
2.8 Prolog
and Document Type Declaration
2.9 Standalone
Document Declaration
2.10 White
Space Handling
2.11 End-of-Line Handling
2.12 Language
Identification
2.13 Normalization Checking
3 Logical Structures
3.1 Start-Tags, End-Tags, and Empty-Element
Tags
3.2 Element Type
Declarations
3.2.1 Element Content
3.2.2 Mixed Content
3.3 Attribute-List
Declarations
3.3.1 Attribute Types
3.3.2 Attribute Defaults
3.3.3 Attribute-Value Normalization
3.4 Conditional Sections
4 Physical Structures
4.1 Character
and Entity References
4.2 Entity
Declarations
4.2.1 Internal Entities
4.2.2 External Entities
4.3 Parsed
Entities
4.3.1 The Text Declaration
4.3.2 Well-Formed Parsed Entities
4.3.3 Character Encoding in Entities
4.3.4 Version Information in Entities
4.4 XML Processor
Treatment of Entities and References
4.4.1 Not Recognized
4.4.2 Included
4.4.3 Included If Validating
4.4.4 Forbidden
4.4.5 Included in Literal
4.4.6 Notify
4.4.7 Bypassed
4.4.8 Included as PE
4.4.9 Error
4.5 Construction of Entity Replacement
Text
4.6 Predefined Entities
4.7 Notation
Declarations
4.8 Document
Entity
5 Conformance
5.1 Validating
and Non-Validating Processors
5.2 Using XML
Processors
6 Notation
A References
A.1 Normative References
A.2 Other
References
B Character Classes
C Expansion of Entity and Character
References (Non-Normative)
D Deterministic Content Models
(Non-Normative)
E Autodetection of Character
Encodings (Non-Normative)
E.1 Detection Without External Encoding
Information
E.2 Priorities in the Presence of
External Encoding Information
F W3C XML Working Group
(Non-Normative)
G W3C XML Core Working Group
(Non-Normative)
H Production Notes
(Non-Normative)
I Suggestions for XML Names
(Non-Normative)
Extensible Markup Language, abbreviated XML, describes a class of data objects called XML documents and partially describes the behavior of computer programs which process them. XML is an application profile or restricted form of SGML, the Standard Generalized Markup Language [ISO 8879]. By construction, XML documents are conforming SGML documents.
XML documents are made up of storage units called entities, which contain either parsed or unparsed data. Parsed data is made up of characters, some of which form character data, and some of which form markup. Markup encodes a description of the document's storage layout and logical structure. XML provides a mechanism to impose constraints on the storage layout and logical structure.
[Definition: A software module called an XML processor is used to read XML documents and provide access to their content and structure.] [Definition: It is assumed that an XML processor is doing its work on behalf of another module, called the application.] This specification describes the required behavior of an XML processor in terms of how it must read XML data and the information it must provide to the application.
XML was developed by an XML Working Group (originally known as the SGML Editorial Review Board) formed under the auspices of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in 1996. It was chaired by Jon Bosak of Sun Microsystems with the active participation of an XML Special Interest Group (previously known as the SGML Working Group) also organized by the W3C. The membership of the XML Working Group is given in an appendix. Dan Connolly served as the WG's contact with the W3C.
The design goals for XML are:
XML shall be straightforwardly usable over the Internet.
XML shall support a wide variety of applications.
XML shall be compatible with SGML.
It shall be easy to write programs which process XML documents.
The number of optional features in XML is to be kept to the absolute minimum, ideally zero.
XML documents should be human-legible and reasonably clear.
The XML design should be prepared quickly.
The design of XML shall be formal and concise.
XML documents shall be easy to create.
Terseness in XML markup is of minimal importance.
This specification, together with associated standards (Unicode [Unicode] and ISO/IEC 10646 [ISO/IEC 10646] for characters, Internet RFC 3066 [IETF RFC 3066] for language identification tags, ISO 639 [ISO 639] for language name codes, and ISO 3166 [ISO 3166] for country name codes), provides all the information necessary to understand XML Version 1.1 and construct computer programs to process it.
This version of the XML specification may be distributed freely, as long as all text and legal notices remain intact.
The terminology used to describe XML documents is defined in the body of this specification. The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when EMPHASIZED, are to be interpreted as described in [IETF RFC 2119]. In addition, the terms defined in the following list are used in building those definitions and in describing the actions of an XML processor:
[Definition: A violation of the rules of this specification; results are undefined. Unless otherwise specified, failure to observe a prescription of this specification indicated by one of the keywords MUST, REQUIRED, MUST NOT, SHALL and SHALL NOT is an error. Conforming software MAY detect and report an error and MAY recover from it.]
[Definition: An error which a conforming XML processor MUST detect and report to the application. After encountering a fatal error, the processor MAY continue processing the data to search for further errors and MAY report such errors to the application. In order to support correction of errors, the processor MAY make unprocessed data from the document (with intermingled character data and markup) available to the application. Once a fatal error is detected, however, the processor MUST NOT continue normal processing (i.e., it MUST NOT continue to pass character data and information about the document's logical structure to the application in the normal way).]
[Definition: Conforming software MAY or MUST (depending on the modal verb in the sentence) behave as described; if it does, it MUST provide users a means to enable or disable the behavior described.]
[Definition: A rule which applies to all valid XML documents. Violations of validity constraints are errors; they MUST, at user option, be reported by validating XML processors.]
[Definition: A rule which applies to all well-formed XML documents. Violations of well-formedness constraints are fatal errors.]
[Definition: (Of strings or names:) Two strings or names being compared MUST be identical. Characters with multiple possible representations in ISO/IEC 10646 (e.g. characters with both precomposed and base+diacritic forms) match only if they have the same representation in both strings. No case folding is performed. (Of strings and rules in the grammar:) A string matches a grammatical production if it belongs to the language generated by that production. (Of content and content models:) An element matches its declaration when it conforms in the fashion described in the constraint [VC: Element Valid].]
[Definition: Marks a sentence describing a feature of XML included solely to ensure that XML remains compatible with SGML.]
[Definition: Marks a sentence describing a non-binding recommendation included to increase the chances that XML documents can be processed by the existing installed base of SGML processors which predate the WebSGML Adaptations Annex to ISO 8879.]
The W3C's XML 1.0 Recommendation was first issued in 1998, and despite the issuance of many errata culminating in a Third Edition of 2003, has remained (by intention) unchanged with respect to what is well-formed XML and what is not. This stability has been extremely useful for interoperability. However, the Unicode Standard on which XML 1.0 relies for character specifications has not remained static, evolving from version 2.0 to version 4.0 and beyond. Characters not present in Unicode 2.0 may already be used in XML 1.0 character data. However, they are not allowed in XML names such as element type names, attribute names, enumerated attribute values, processing instruction targets, and so on. In addition, some characters that should have been permitted in XML names were not, due to oversights and inconsistencies in Unicode 2.0.
The overall philosophy of names has changed since XML 1.0. Whereas XML 1.0 provided a rigid definition of names, wherein everything that was not permitted was forbidden, XML 1.1 names are designed so that everything that is not forbidden (for a specific reason) is permitted. Since Unicode will continue to grow past version 4.0, further changes to XML can be avoided by allowing almost any character, including those not yet assigned, in names.
In addition, XML 1.0 attempts to adapt to the line-end conventions of various modern operating systems, but discriminates against the conventions used on IBM and IBM-compatible mainframes. As a result, XML documents on mainframes are not plain text files according to the local conventions. XML 1.0 documents generated on mainframes must either violate the local line-end conventions, or employ otherwise unnecessary translation phases before parsing and after generation. Allowing straightforward interoperability is particularly important when data stores are shared between mainframe and non-mainframe systems (as opposed to being copied from one to the other). Therefore XML 1.1 adds NEL (#x85) to the list of line-end characters. For completeness, the Unicode line separator character, #x2028, is also supported.
Finally, there is considerable demand to define a standard representation of arbitrary Unicode characters in XML documents. Therefore, XML 1.1 allows the use of character references to the control characters #x1 through #x1F, most of which are forbidden in XML 1.0. For reasons of robustness, however, these characters still cannot be used directly in documents. In order to improve the robustness of character encoding detection, the additional control characters #x7F through #x9F, which were freely allowed in XML 1.0 documents, now must also appear only as character references. (Whitespace characters are of course exempt.) The minor sacrifice of backward compatibility is considered not significant. Due to potential problems with APIs, #x0 is still forbidden both directly and as a character reference.
A new XML version, rather than a set of errata to XML 1.0, is being created because the changes affect the definition of well-formed documents. XML 1.0 processors must continue to reject documents that contain new characters in XML names, new line-end conventions, and references to control characters. The distinction between XML 1.0 and XML 1.1 documents is indicated by the version number information in the XML declaration at the start of each document.
[Definition: A data object is an XML document if it is well-formed, as defined in this specification. A well-formed XML document MAY in addition be valid if it meets certain further constraints.]
Each XML document has both a logical and a physical structure. Physically, the document is composed of units called entities. An entity MAY refer to other entities to cause their inclusion in the document. A document begins in a "root" or document entity. Logically, the document is composed of declarations, elements, comments, character references, and processing instructions, all of which are indicated in the document by explicit markup. The logical and physical structures MUST nest properly, as described in 4.3.2 Well-Formed Parsed Entities.
[Definition: A textual object is a well-formed XML document if:]
Taken as a whole, it matches the production labeled document.
It meets all the well-formedness constraints given in this specification.
Each of the parsed entities which is referenced directly or indirectly within the document is well-formed.
| [1] | document |
::= | prolog element Misc* |
Matching the document production implies that:
It contains one or more elements.
[Definition: There is exactly one element, called the root, or document element, no part of which appears in the content of any other element.] For all other elements, if the start-tag is in the content of another element, the end-tag is in the content of the same element. More simply stated, the elements, delimited by start- and end-tags, nest properly within each other.
[Definition: As a consequence of this,
for each non-root element C in the document,
there is one other element P in the document
such that C is in the content of
P, but is not in the content of any other
element that is in the content of P.
P is referred to as the parent of
C, and C as a child of
P.]
[Definition: A parsed entity contains text, a sequence of characters, which may represent markup or character data.] [Definition: A character is an atomic unit of text as specified by ISO/IEC 10646:2000 [ISO/IEC 10646]. Legal characters are tab, carriage return, line feed, and the legal characters of Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646. The versions of these standards cited in A.1 Normative References were current at the time this document was prepared. New characters may be added to these standards by amendments or new editions. Consequently, XML processors MUST accept any character in the range specified for Char]
The mechanism for encoding character code points into bit patterns MAY vary from entity to entity. All XML processors MUST accept the UTF-8 and UTF-16 encodings of Unicode 3.1 [Unicode3]; the mechanisms for signaling which of the two is in use, or for bringing other encodings into play, are discussed later, in 4.3.3 Character Encoding in Entities.
Note:
Document authors are encouraged to avoid "compatibility characters", as defined in section 6.8 of [Unicode] (see also D21 in section 3.6 of [Unicode3]). The characters defined in the following ranges are also discouraged. They are either control characters or permanently undefined Unicode characters:
[#x7F-#x84], [#x86-#x9F], [#xFDD0-#xFDDF], [#1FFFE-#x1FFFF], [#2FFFE-#x2FFFF], [#3FFFE-#x3FFFF], [#4FFFE-#x4FFFF], [#5FFFE-#x5FFFF], [#6FFFE-#x6FFFF], [#7FFFE-#x7FFFF], [#8FFFE-#x8FFFF], [#9FFFE-#x9FFFF], [#AFFFE-#xAFFFF], [#BFFFE-#xBFFFF], [#CFFFE-#xCFFFF], [#DFFFE-#xDFFFF], [#EFFFE-#xEFFFF], [#FFFFE-#xFFFFF], [#10FFFE-#x10FFFF].
This section defines some symbols used widely in the grammar.
S (white space) consists of one or more space (#x20) characters, carriage returns, line feeds, or tabs.
| [3] | S |
::= | (#x20 | #x9 | #xD | #xA)+ |
Note:
The presence of #xD in the above production is maintained purely for backward compatibility with the First Edition. As explained in 2.11 End-of-Line Handling, all #xD characters literally present in an XML document are either removed or replaced by #xA characters before any other processing is done. The only way to get a #xD character to match this production is to use a character reference in an entity value literal.
[Definition: A Name is a token beginning
with a letter or one of a few punctuation characters, and
continuing with letters, digits, hyphens, underscores,
colons, or full stops, together known as name characters.]
Names beginning with the string "xml", or
with any string which would match
(('X'|'x') ('M'|'m') ('L'|'l')), are reserved
for standardization in this or future versions of this
specification.
Note:
The Namespaces in XML Recommendation [XML Names] assigns a meaning to names containing colon characters. Therefore, authors should not use the colon in XML names except for namespace purposes, but XML processors must accept the colon as a name character.
An Nmtoken (name token) is any mixture of name characters.
The first character of a Name MUST be a NameStartChar, and any other characters MUST be NameChars; this mechanism is used to prevent names from beginning with European (ASCII) digits or with basic combining characters. Almost all characters are permitted in names, except those which either are or reasonably could be used as delimiters. The intention is to be inclusive rather than exclusive, so that writing systems not yet encoded in Unicode can be used in XML names. See I Suggestions for XML Names for suggestions on the creation of names.
Document authors are encouraged to use names which are meaningful words or combinations of words in natural languages, and to avoid symbolic or whitespace characters in names. Note that COLON, HYPHEN-MINUS, FULL STOP (period), LOW LINE (underscore), and MIDDLE DOT are explicitly permitted.
The ASCII symbols and punctuation marks, along with a fairly large group of Unicode symbol characters, are excluded from names because they are more useful as delimiters in contexts where XML names are used outside XML documents; providing this group gives those contexts hard guarantees about what cannot be part of an XML name. The character #x037E, GREEK QUESTION MARK, is excluded because when normalized it becomes a semicolon, which could change the meaning of entity references.
| [4] | NameStartChar |
::= | ":" | [A-Z] | "_" | [a-z] | [#xC0-#xD6] |
[#xD8-#xF6] | [#xF8-#x2FF] | [#x370-#x37D] |
[#x37F-#x1FFF] | [#x200C-#x200D] | [#x2070-#x218F] |
[#x2C00-#x2FEF] | [#x3001-#xD7FF] | [#xF900-#xFDCF] |
[#xFDF0-#xFFFD] | [#x10000-#xEFFFF] |
| [4a] | NameChar |
::= | NameStartChar | "-" | "." |
[0-9] | #xB7 | [#x0300-#x036F] |
[#x203F-#x2040] |
| [5] | Name |
::= | NameStartChar (NameChar)* |
| [6] | Names |
::= | Name (#x20 Name)* |
| [7] | Nmtoken |
::= | (NameChar)+ |
| [8] | Nmtokens |
::= | Nmtoken (#x20
Nmtoken)* |
Note:
The Names and Nmtokens productions are used to define the validity of tokenized attribute values after normalization (see 3.3.1 Attribute Types).
Literal data is any quoted string not containing the quotation mark used as a delimiter for that string. Literals are used for specifying the content of internal entities (EntityValue), the values of attributes (AttValue), and external identifiers (SystemLiteral). Note that a SystemLiteral can be parsed without scanning for markup.
| [9] | EntityValue |
::= | '"' ([^%&"] | PEReference | Reference)* '"' |
| "'" ([^%&'] | PEReference | Reference)* "'" |
|||
| [10] | AttValue |
::= | '"' ([^<&"] | Reference)* '"' |
| "'" ([^<&'] | Reference)* "'" |
|||
| [11] | SystemLiteral |
::= | ('"' [^"]* '"') | ("'" [^']*
"'") |
| [12] | PubidLiteral |
::= | '"' PubidChar*
'"' | "'" (PubidChar -
"'")* "'" |
| [13] | PubidChar |
::= | #x20 | #xD | #xA | [a-zA-Z0-9]
| [-'()+,./:=?;!*#@$_%] |
Note:
Although the EntityValue
production allows the definition of an entity consisting
of a single explicit < in the literal
(e.g., <!ENTITY mylt "<">), it is
strongly advised to avoid this practice since any
reference to that entity will cause a well-formedness
error.
Text consists of intermingled character data and markup. [Definition: Markup takes the form of start-tags, end-tags, empty-element tags, entity references, character references, comments, CDATA section delimiters, document type declarations, processing instructions, XML declarations, text declarations, and any white space that is at the top level of the document entity (that is, outside the document element and not inside any other markup).]
[Definition: All text that is not markup constitutes the character data of the document.]
The ampersand character (&) and the left angle
bracket (<) MUST NOT
appear in their literal form,
except when used as markup delimiters, or within a
comment, a
processing
instruction, or a CDATA section. If they are needed
elsewhere, they MUST be escaped using either
numeric
character references or the strings
"&" and "<"
respectively. The right angle bracket (>) MAY be
represented using the string ">", and
MUST, for
compatibility, be escaped using either
">" or a character reference when it
appears in the string "]]>" in content,
when that string is not marking the end of a CDATA section.
In the content of elements, character data is any string
of characters which does not contain the start-delimiter of
any markup. In a CDATA section, character data is any
string of characters not including the CDATA-section-close
delimiter, "]]>".
To allow attribute values to contain both single and
double quotes, the apostrophe or single-quote character (')
MAY be represented as
"'", and the double-quote character
(") as """.
| [14] | CharData |
::= | [^<&]* - ([^<&]* ']]>'
[^<&]*) |
[Definition: Comments MAY
appear anywhere in a document outside other markup; in addition, they
MAY appear within the
document type declaration at places allowed by the grammar.
They are not part of the document's character data; an
XML processor MAY, but need not, make
it possible for an application to retrieve the text of
comments. For compatibility, the string
"--" (double-hyphen) MUST NOT occur
within comments.] Parameter entity references MUST NOT be
recognized within comments.
| [15] | Comment |
::= | '<!--' ((Char -
'-') | ('-' (Char - '-')))*
'-->' |
An example of a comment:
<!-- declarations for <head> & <body> -->
Note that the grammar does not allow a comment ending in
--->. The following example is not
well-formed.
<!-- B+, B, or B--->
[Definition: Processing instructions (PIs) allow documents to contain instructions for applications.]
| [16] | PI |
::= | '<?' PITarget
(S (Char*
- (Char* '?>' Char*)))? '?>' |
| [17] | PITarget |
::= | Name - (('X' | 'x')
('M' | 'm') ('L' | 'l')) |
PIs are not part of the document's character data,
but MUST be passed through
to the application. The PI begins with a target (PITarget) used to identify the
application to which the instruction is directed. The
target names "XML", "xml", and so
on are reserved for standardization in this or future
versions of this specification. The XML Notation mechanism MAY be
used for formal declaration of PI targets. Parameter entity
references MUST NOT be
recognized within processing instructions.
[Definition: CDATA sections
MAY occur anywhere
character data may occur; they are used to escape blocks of
text containing characters which would otherwise be
recognized as markup. CDATA sections begin with the string
"<![CDATA[" and end with the string
"]]>":]
| [18] | CDSect |
::= | CDStart CData CDEnd |
| [19] | CDStart |
::= | '<![CDATA[' |
| [20] | CData |
::= | (Char* - (Char* ']]>' Char*)) |
| [21] | CDEnd |
::= | ']]>' |
Within a CDATA section, only the CDEnd string is recognized as markup, so
that left angle brackets and ampersands may occur in their
literal form; they need not (and cannot) be escaped using
"<" and "&". CDATA
sections cannot nest.
An example of a CDATA section, in which
"<greeting>" and
"</greeting>" are recognized as
character
data, not markup:
<![CDATA[<greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>]]>
[Definition: XML documents SHOULD begin with an XML declaration which specifies the version of XML being used.] For example, the following is a complete XML document, well-formed but not valid:
<?xml version="1.0"?> <greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>
and so is this:
<greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>
The function of the markup in an XML document is to describe its storage and logical structure and to associateattribute name-value pairs with its logical structures. XML provides a mechanism, the document type declaration, to define constraints on the logical structure and to support the use of predefined storage units. [Definition: An XML document is valid if it has an associated document type declaration and if the document complies with the constraints expressed in it.]
The document type declaration MUST appear before the first element in the document.
| [22] | prolog |
::= | XMLDecl? Misc* (doctypedecl Misc*)? |
| [23] | XMLDecl |
::= | '<?xml' VersionInfo EncodingDecl? SDDecl? S?'?>' |
| [24] | VersionInfo |
::= | S 'version' Eq ("'" VersionNum "'" | '"' VersionNum '"') |
| [25] | Eq |
::= | S? '=' S? |
| [26] | VersionNum |
::= | '1.1' |
| [27] | Misc |
::= | Comment |
PI | S |
[Definition: The XML document type declaration contains or points to markup declarations that provide a grammar for a class of documents. This grammar is known as a document type definition, or DTD. The document type declaration can point to an external subset (a special kind of external entity) containing markup declarations, or can contain the markup declarations directly in an internal subset, or can do both. The DTD for a document consists of both subsets taken together.]
[Definition: A markup declaration is an element type declaration, an attribute-list declaration, an entity declaration, or a notation declaration.] These declarations MAY be contained in whole or in part within parameter entities, as described in the well-formedness and validity constraints below. For further information, see 4 Physical Structures.
| [28] | doctypedecl |
::= | '<!DOCTYPE' S
Name (S
ExternalID)? S? ('[' intSubset ']' S?)? '>' |
[VC: Root Element Type] |
| [WFC: External Subset] | ||||
| [28a] | DeclSep |
::= | PEReference |
S |
[WFC: PE Between Declarations] |
| [28b] | intSubset |
::= | (markupdecl |
DeclSep)* |
|
| [29] | markupdecl |
::= | elementdecl |
AttlistDecl | EntityDecl | NotationDecl | PI | Comment |
[VC: Proper Declaration/PE Nesting] |
| [WFC: PEs in Internal Subset] |
Note that it is possible to construct a well-formed document containing a doctypedecl that neither points to an external subset nor contains an internal subset.
The markup declarations MAY be made up in whole or in part of the replacement text of parameter entities. The productions later in this specification for individual nonterminals (elementdecl, AttlistDecl, and so on) describe the declarations after all the parameter entities have been included.
Parameter entity references are recognized anywhere in the DTD (internal and external subsets and external parameter entities), except in literals, processing instructions, comments, and the contents of ignored conditional sections (see 3.4 Conditional Sections). They are also recognized in entity value literals. The use of parameter entities in the internal subset is restricted as described below.
Validity constraint: Root Element Type
The Name in the document type declaration MUST match the element type of the root element.
Validity constraint: Proper Declaration/PE Nesting
Parameter-entity replacement text MUST be properly nested with markup declarations. That is to say, if either the first character or the last character of a markup declaration (markupdecl above) is contained in the replacement text for a parameter-entity reference, both MUST be contained in the same replacement text.
Well-formedness constraint: PEs in Internal Subset
In the internal DTD subset, parameter-entity references MUST NOT occur within markup declarations; they MAY occur where markup declarations can occur. (This does not apply to references that occur in external parameter entities or to the external subset.)
Well-formedness constraint: External Subset
The external subset, if any, MUST match the production for extSubset.
Well-formedness constraint: PE Between Declarations
The replacement text of a parameter entity reference in a DeclSep MUST match the production extSubsetDecl.
Like the internal subset, the external subset and any external parameter entities referenced in a DeclSep MUST consist of a series of complete markup declarations of the types allowed by the non-terminal symbol markupdecl, interspersed with white space or parameter-entity references. However, portions of the contents of the external subset or of these external parameter entities MAY conditionally be ignored by using the conditional section construct; this is not allowed in the internal subset but is allowed in external parameter entities referenced in the internal subset.
| [30] | extSubset |
::= | TextDecl?
extSubsetDecl |
| [31] | extSubsetDecl |
::= | ( markupdecl |
conditionalSect |
DeclSep)* |
The external subset and external parameter entities also differ from the internal subset in that in them, parameter-entity references are permitted within markup declarations, not only between markup declarations.
An example of an XML document with a document type declaration:
<?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE greeting SYSTEM "hello.dtd"> <greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>
The system
identifier "hello.dtd" gives the address
(a URI reference) of a DTD for the document.
The declarations can also be given locally, as in this example:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <!DOCTYPE greeting [ <!ELEMENT greeting (#PCDATA)> ]> <greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>
If both the external and internal subsets are used, the internal subset MUST be considered to occur before the external subset. This has the effect that entity and attribute-list declarations in the internal subset take precedence over those in the external subset.
XML 1.1 processors should accept XML 1.0 documents as well. If a document is well-formed or valid XML 1.0, and provided it does not contain any control characters in the range [#x7F-#x9F] other than as character escapes, it may be made well-formed or valid XML 1.1 respectively simply by changing the version number.
Markup declarations can affect the content of the document, as passed from an XML processor to an application; examples are attribute defaults and entity declarations. The standalone document declaration, which MAY appear as a component of the XML declaration, signals whether or not there are such declarations which appear external to the document entity or in parameter entities. [Definition: An external markup declaration is defined as a markup declaration occurring in the external subset or in a parameter entity (external or internal, the latter being included because non-validating processors are not required to read them).]
| [32] | SDDecl |
::= | #x20+ 'standalone' Eq
(("'" ('yes' | 'no') "'") | ('"' ('yes' | 'no')
'"')) |
[VC: Standalone Document Declaration] |
In a standalone document declaration, the value "yes" indicates that there are no external markup declarations which affect the information passed from the XML processor to the application. The value "no" indicates that there are or may be such external markup declarations. Note that the standalone document declaration only denotes the presence of external declarations; the presence, in a document, of references to external entities, when those entities are internally declared, does not change its standalone status.
If there are no external markup declarations, the standalone document declaration has no meaning. If there are external markup declarations but there is no standalone document declaration, the value "no" is assumed.
Any XML document for which standalone="no"
holds can be converted algorithmically to a standalone
document, which may be desirable for some network delivery
applications.
Validity constraint: Standalone Document Declaration
The standalone document declaration MUST have the value "no" if any external markup declarations contain declarations of:
attributes with default values, if elements to which these attributes apply appear in the document without specifications of values for these attributes, or
entities (other than amp,
lt, gt, apos,
quot), if references to those entities
appear in the document, or
attributes with tokenized types, where the attribute appears in the document with a value such that normalization will produce a different value from that which would be produced in the absence of the declaration, or
element types with element content, if white space occurs directly within any instance of those types.
An example XML declaration with a standalone document declaration:
<?xml version="1.1" standalone='yes'?>
In editing XML documents, it is often convenient to use "white space" (spaces, tabs, and blank lines) to set apart the markup for greater readability. Such white space is typically not intended for inclusion in the delivered version of the document. On the other hand, "significant" white space that should be preserved in the delivered version is common, for example in poetry and source code.
An XML processor MUST always pass all characters in a document that are not markup through to the application. A validating XML processor MUST also inform the application which of these characters constitute white space appearing in element content.
A special attribute named xml:space
MAY be attached to an
element to signal an intention that in that element, white
space should be preserved by applications. In valid
documents, this attribute, like any other, MUST be
declared if it is used. When declared, it
MUST be given as an
enumerated type whose values are one
or both of "default" and "preserve". For example:
<!ATTLIST poem xml:space (default|preserve) 'preserve'> <!ATTLIST pre xml:space (preserve) #FIXED 'preserve'>
The value "default" signals that applications' default
white-space processing modes are acceptable for this
element; the value "preserve" indicates the intent that
applications preserve all the white space. This declared
intent is considered to apply to all elements within the
content of the element where it is specified, unless
overridden with another instance of the
xml:space attribute. This specification
does not give meaning to any value of
xml:space other than "default" and "preserve".
It is an error for other values to be specified; the XML
processor MAY report the error or
MAY recover by ignoring
the attribute specification or by reporting the (erroneous)
value to the application. Applications may ignore or reject
erroneous values.
The root element of any document is considered to have signaled no intentions as regards application space handling, unless it provides a value for this attribute or the attribute is declared with a default value.
XML parsed entities are often stored in computer files which, for editing convenience, are organized into lines. These lines are typically separated by some combination of the characters carriage-return (#xD) and line-feed (#xA).
To simplify the tasks of applications, the XML processor MUST behave as if it normalized all line breaks in external parsed entities (including the document entity) on input, before parsing, by translating all of the following to a single #xA character:
the two-character sequence #xD #xA
the two-character sequence #xD #x85
the single character #x85
the single character #x2028
any #xD character that is not immediately followed by #xA or #x85.
The characters #x85 and #x2028 cannot be reliably recognized and translated until an entity's encoding declaration (if present) has been read. Therefore, it is a fatal error to use them within the XML declaration or text declaration.
In document processing, it is often useful to identify
the natural or formal language in which the content is
written. A special attribute named xml:lang
MAY be inserted in
documents to specify the language used in the contents and
attribute values of any element in an XML document. In
valid documents, this attribute, like any other, MUST be
declared if it is used. The values of the
attribute are language identifiers as defined by [IETF RFC 3066], Tags for the
Identification of Languages, or its successor;
in addition, the empty string MAY be
specified.
(Productions 33 through 38 have been removed.)
For example:
<p xml:lang="en">The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.</p> <p xml:lang="en-GB">What colour is it?</p> <p xml:lang="en-US">What color is it?</p> <sp who="Faust" desc='leise' xml:lang="de"> <l>Habe nun, ach! Philosophie,</l> <l>Juristerei, und Medizin</l> <l>und leider auch Theologie</l> <l>durchaus studiert mit heißem Bemüh'n.</l> </sp>
The intent declared with xml:lang is
considered to apply to all attributes and content of the
element where it is specified, unless overridden with an
instance of xml:lang on another element within
that content. In particular, the empty value of
xml:lang is used on an element B to override a
specification of xml:lang on an enclosing
element A, without specifying another language. Within B,
it is considered that there is no language information
available, just as if xml:lang had not been
specified on B or any of its ancestors.
Note:
Language information may also be provided by external
transport protocols (e.g. HTTP or MIME). When available,
this information may be used by XML applications, but the
more local information provided by xml:lang
should be considered to override it.
A simple declaration for xml:lang might
take the form
xml:lang CDATA #IMPLIED
but specific default values MAY also be given, if
appropriate. In a collection of French poems for English
students, with glosses and notes in English, the
xml:lang attribute might be declared this
way:
<!ATTLIST poem xml:lang CDATA 'fr'> <!ATTLIST gloss xml:lang CDATA 'en'> <!ATTLIST note xml:lang CDATA 'en'>
All XML parsed entities (including document entities) SHOULD be fully normalized as per the definition of [Charmod] supplemented by the following definitions of relevant constructs for XML:
The replacement text of all parsed entities
All text matching, in context, one of the following productions:
However, a document is still well-formed even if it is not fully normalized. XML processors SHOULD provide a user option to verify that the document being processed is in fully normalized form, and report to the application whether it is or not. The option to not verify SHOULD be chosen only when the input text is certified, as defined by [Charmod].
The verification of full normalization MUST be carried out as if by first verifying that the entity is in include-normalized form as defined by [Charmod] and by then verifying that none of the relevant constructs listed above begins (after character references are expanded) with a composing character as defined by [Charmod]. Non-validating processors MUST ignore possible denormalizations that would be caused by inclusion of external entities that they do not read.
Note:
The composing characters are all Unicode characters of non-zero combining class, plus a small number of class-zero characters that nevertheless take part as a non-initial character in certain Unicode canonical decompositions. Since these characters are meant to follow base characters, restricting relevant constructs (including content) from beginning with a composing character does not meaningfully diminish the expressiveness of XML.
If, while verifying full normalization, a processor encounters characters for which it cannot determine the normalization properties (i.e., characters introduced in a version of [Unicode3] later than the one used in the implementation of the processor), then the processor MAY, at user option, ignore any possible denormalizations caused by these characters. The option to ignore those denormalizations SHOULD not be chosen by applications when reliability or security are critical.
XML processors MUST not transform the input to be in fully normalized form. XML applications that create XML 1.1 output from either XML 1.1 or XML 1.0 input SHOULD ensure that the output is fully normalized; it is not necessary for internal processing forms to be fully normalized.
The purpose of this section is to strongly encourage XML processors to ensure that the creators of XML documents have properly normalized them, so that XML applications can make tests such as identity comparisons of strings without having to worry about the different possible "spellings" of strings which Unicode allows.
When entities are in a non-Unicode encoding, if the processor transcodes them to Unicode, it SHOULD use a normalizing transcoder.
[Definition: Each XML document contains one or more elements, the boundaries of which are either delimited by start-tags and end-tags, or, for empty elements, by an empty-element tag. Each element has a type, identified by name, sometimes called its "generic identifier" (GI), and MAY have a set of attribute specifications.] Each attribute specification has a name and a value.
| [39] | element |
::= | EmptyElemTag |
|
| STag content ETag |
[WFC: Element Type Match] | |||
| [VC: Element Valid] |
This specification does not constrain the semantics, use,
or (beyond syntax) names of the element types and attributes,
except that names beginning with a match to
(('X'|'x')('M'|'m')('L'|'l')) are reserved for
standardization in this or future versions of this
specification.
Well-formedness constraint: Element Type Match
The Name in an element's end-tag MUST match the element type in the start-tag.
Validity constraint: Element Valid
An element is valid if there is a declaration matching elementdecl where the Name matches the element type, and one of the following holds:
The declaration matches EMPTY and the element has no content (not even entity references, comments, PIs or white space).
The declaration matches children and the sequence of child elements belongs to the language generated by the regular expression in the content model, with optional white space, comments and PIs (i.e. markup matching production [27] Misc) between the start-tag and the first child element, between child elements, or between the last child element and the end-tag. Note that a CDATA section containing only white space or a reference to an entity whose replacement text is character references expanding to white space do not match the nonterminal S, and hence cannot appear in these positions; however, a reference to an internal entity with a literal value consisting of character references expanding to white space does match S, since its replacement text is the white space resulting from expansion of the character references.
The declaration matches Mixed and the content (after replacing any entity references with their replacement text) consists of character data, comments, PIs and child elements whose types match names in the content model.
The declaration matches ANY, and the content (after replacing any entity references with their replacement text) consists of character data and child elements whose types have been declared.
[Definition: The beginning of every non-empty XML element is marked by a start-tag.]
| [40] | STag |
::= | '<' Name
(S Attribute)* S? '>' |
[WFC: Unique Att Spec] |
| [41] | Attribute |
::= | Name Eq AttValue |
[VC: Attribute Value Type] |
| [WFC: No External Entity References] | ||||
| [WFC: No < in Attribute Values] |
The Name in the start- and
end-tags gives the element's type. [Definition:
The Name-AttValue pairs are referred to as the
attribute specifications of the element], [Definition: with the Name in each pair referred to as the
attribute name] and [Definition: the
content of the AttValue (the
text between the ' or "
delimiters) as the attribute value.]Note that the
order of attribute specifications in a start-tag or
empty-element tag is not significant.
Well-formedness constraint: Unique Att Spec
An attribute name MUST NOT appear more than once in the same start-tag or empty-element tag.
Validity constraint: Attribute Value Type
The attribute MUST have been declared; the value MUST be of the type declared for it. (For attribute types, see 3.3 Attribute-List Declarations.)
Well-formedness constraint: No External Entity References
Attribute values MUST NOT contain direct or indirect entity references to external entities.
Well-formedness constraint: No
< in Attribute Values
The replacement text of any entity
referred to directly or indirectly in an attribute value
MUST NOT contain a
<.
An example of a start-tag:
<termdef id="dt-dog" term="dog">
[Definition: The end of every element that begins with a start-tag MUST be marked by an end-tag containing a name that echoes the element's type as given in the start-tag:]
| [42] | ETag |
::= | '</' Name
S? '>' |
An example of an end-tag:
</termdef>
[Definition: The text between the start-tag and end-tag is called the element's content:]
| [43] | content |
::= | CharData?
((element | Reference | CDSect | PI |
Comment) CharData?)* |
[Definition: An element with no content is said to be empty.] The representation of an empty element is either a start-tag immediately followed by an end-tag, or an empty-element tag. [Definition: An empty-element tag takes a special form:]
| [44] | EmptyElemTag |
::= | '<' Name
(S Attribute)* S? '/>' |
[WFC: Unique Att Spec] |
Empty-element tags MAY be used for any element which has no content, whether or not it is declared using the keyword EMPTY. For interoperability, the empty-element tag SHOULD be used, and SHOULD only be used, for elements which are declared EMPTY.
Examples of empty elements:
<IMG align="left" src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/WWW/w3c_home" /> <br></br> <br/>
The element structure of an XML document MAY, for validation purposes, be constrained using element type and attribute-list declarations. An element type declaration constrains the element's content.
Element type declarations often constrain which element types can appear as children of the element. At user option, an XML processor MAY issue a warning when a declaration mentions an element type for which no declaration is provided, but this is not an error.
[Definition: An element type declaration takes the form:]
| [45] | elementdecl |
::= | '<!ELEMENT' S
Name S
contentspec S? '>' |
[VC: Unique Element Type Declaration] |
| [46] | contentspec |
::= | 'EMPTY' | 'ANY' | Mixed | children |
where the Name gives the element type being declared.
Validity constraint: Unique Element Type Declaration
An element type MUST NOT be declared more than once.
Examples of element type declarations:
<!ELEMENT br EMPTY> <!ELEMENT p (#PCDATA|emph)* > <!ELEMENT %name.para; %content.para; > <!ELEMENT container ANY>
[Definition: An element type has element content when elements of that type MUST contain only child elements (no character data), optionally separated by white space (characters matching the nonterminal S).] [Definition: In this case, the constraint includes a content model, a simple grammar governing the allowed types of the child elements and the order in which they are allowed to appear.] The grammar is built on content particles (cps), which consist of names, choice lists of content particles, or sequence lists of content particles:
| [47] | children |
::= | (choice |
seq) ('?' | '*' |
'+')? |
|
| [48] | cp |
::= | (Name | choice | seq) ('?' | '*' | '+')? |
|
| [49] | choice |
::= | '(' S? cp ( S? '|'
S? cp )+
S? ')' |
[VC: Proper Group/PE Nesting] |
| [50] | seq |
::= | '(' S? cp ( S? ','
S? cp )*
S? ')' |
[VC: Proper Group/PE Nesting] |
where each Name is the type of
an element which MAY appear as a
child.
Any content particle in a choice list MAY appear in
the element content at the location
where the choice list appears in the grammar; content
particles occurring in a sequence list MUST
each appear in the element content in the order given
in the list. The optional character following a name or
list governs whether the element or the content particles
in the list may occur one or more (+), zero
or more (*), or zero or one times
(?). The absence of such an operator means
that the element or content particle MUST appear
exactly once. This syntax and meaning are identical to
those used in the productions in this specification.
The content of an element matches a content model if and only if it is possible to trace out a path through the content model, obeying the sequence, choice, and repetition operators and matching each element in the content against an element type in the content model. For compatibility, it is an error if the content model allows an element to match more than one occurrence of an element type in the content model. For more information, see D Deterministic Content Models.
Validity constraint: Proper Group/PE Nesting
Parameter-entity replacement text MUST be properly nested with parenthesized groups. That is to say, if either of the opening or closing parentheses in a choice, seq, or Mixed construct is contained in the replacement text for a parameter entity, both MUST be contained in the same replacement text.
For interoperability, if a
parameter-entity reference appears in a choice, seq, or
Mixed construct, its
replacement text SHOULD contain at
least one non-blank character, and neither the first
nor last non-blank character of the replacement text
SHOULD be a
connector (| or ,).
Examples of element-content models:
<!ELEMENT spec (front, body, back?)> <!ELEMENT div1 (head, (p | list | note)*, div2*)> <!ELEMENT dictionary-body (%div.mix; | %dict.mix;)*>
[Definition: An element type has mixed content when elements of that type MAY contain character data, optionally interspersed with child elements.] In this case, the types of the child elements MAY be constrained, but not their order or their number of occurrences:
| [51] | Mixed |
::= | '(' S? '#PCDATA'
(S? '|' S?
Name)* S? ')*' |
|
| '(' S? '#PCDATA'
S? ')' |
[VC: Proper Group/PE Nesting] | |||
| [VC: No Duplicate Types |