Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Jon.Bosak@eng.Sun.COM (Jon Bosak)
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 17:53:00 -0800
| This is totally optional and experimental. The only rational is that
| for large documents or documents with long tag names, this saves a lot
| of bytes.
Tests have shown that this difference disappears under compression.
| Think of it as a kind of compression technique that would
| only be enabled when both ends of the pipe can handle it.
Empty end tags are a well formedness error, and the behavior of a
conforming XML processor upon encountering such an error is to stop
The prohibition on empty end tags was adopted specifically to enable
users to perform a large class of maintenance operations on XML
documents without having to buy commercial software. I'm having a
very difficult time seeing this as anything but a blatant attempt to
subvert the standard by implementing a nonstandard feature in a widely
disseminated parser. Please help me to understand this differently.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)