[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
- From: David Brownell <email@example.com>
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:33:30 -0700
> However, the fact remains: every document that was a well-formed
> XML 1.0 document was also a well-formed XML 1.0 2nd edition
> document. Every document that was not a well-formed XML 1.0
> document was also not a well-formed XML 1.0 2nd edition document.
> Ditto for validity.
In addition to new validity constraints (John mentioned) ...
... there was discussion recently about whether UTF-8 BOM got
declared to be legal in 2nd edition. A non-normative section now
says so, as does the UDDI spec in some cases; SOAP-friendliness
sems to demand changing the definition of WF-ness to permit a
UTF-8 BOM in 2nd ed "plus errata" (or removing the UTF-8
BOM from the non-normative section, fixing UDDI, etc). That'd
be a change from being a WFness error to being WF.