[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- To: xml-editor@w3.org, "xml-dev@xml.org" <xml-dev@xml.org>, "xml-dev@xml.org" <xml-dev@xml.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 22:01:20 -0700
At 02:51 PM 5/24/00 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Currently the XML Recommendation is silent about the handling of
>documents that contain "impossible" bytes. For example, the byte 0xFF
>cannot appear in any UTF-8 encoded document. We are considering making
>such violations of the encoding a fatal error.
Tricky one. If detected, it should be a fatal error in the draconian
XML style.
...
>CON: Some parsers may be relying on libraries supplied by the OS, which may
>not properly signal erroneous input.
Wow... what would they actually do, I wonder? This seems kind of horrid.
I think it should stay fatal, on the following analogy: if a document
contained "<foo<<<<>" and a broken system I/O library supressed all but
the first "<<<<<", the error would be undetectable. But the document's
still broken. I think the analogy is exact. -T.
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|