[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML Blueberry
- From: John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: David Brownell <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 10:32:15 -0400
David Brownell wrote:
> Crimson augments some version of Unicode rules (java.lang.Character, as
> specified in the Java language spec) with special cases as identified in the
> XML 1.0 spec ... so if Java changes its level of Unicode conformance, that
> parser's behavior will. It was conformant to Appendix B a while back.
> AElfred2 uses java.lang.Character directly, and doesn't try to add all the
> funky special cases. That suits its original "mostly correct, but simple"
> goals, but leads to mild nonconformance (nobody's complained!) for
> Appendix B rules about what can be name/namestart characters.
> I don't know what Xerces does, but when I first looked it the character
> processing was incomprehensible, also nonconformant. I understand
> that the current versions are merely incomprehensible ... :)
In short, parsers often don't get name conformance right, and changing
the rules will not affect them much: broken remains broken.
> p.s. Here's a radical thought. Rather than death by a thousand cuts,
> why not just come out with a DTD-less XML? One big change,
> not lots of small ones -- easier to manage such changes.
If you want SML, you know where to find it.
There is / one art || John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein