From: Phill Davies <binary011010@...>
Date: 2008-07-30T06:38:47+09:00
Subject: Re: libxml: is it possible not to use doctype declaration?

I tried to reply to this via the ruby-talk mailing list and it didn't 
work. Not sure why not, maybe someone can fill me in on that. Anyway, 
here's my take:

To start, the rdoc documentation can be found at 
http://libxml.rubyforge.org/rdoc/index.html. Now I don't know this for 
sure, but

<!DOCTYPE test PUBLIC "-//FARAWAY//DTD-verweg//NL" 
"http://some.site.nl/dtd/test.dtd">

doesn't look like a real doctype definition, so if you can pull it out 
of your xml (by hand, not programmatically) before trying to parse it, 
I'd say that would be a good idea. That being said, there are two 
attributes of the XML::Parser class that look like they may be of 
interest: default_load_external_dtd and default_validity_checking. Try 
setting both of those to false, unless you have a real dtd to validate 
against and the example above was fake. Of course, since this is using 
XML::Parser instead of XML::Document I think you would need to do e.g.: 
parser = XML::Parser.file(<file>)
parser.default_load_external_dtd = false
parser.default_validity_checking = false
doc = parser.parse

... and then go from there.
Phill D.


Phlip wrote:
> ruud grosmann wrote:
> 
>> Is using libxml the right thing to do to, or are there smarter alternatives?
> 
> Libxml-ruby is the most complete & accurate parser of the big three 
> (REXML,
> Libxml-ruby, and Hpricot), and its documentation can be very 
> challenging. How
> much of the original C Libxml documentation have you been able to read?

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.