[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: "Richard Tobin" <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Suggestion for an alternative XML 1.1
- From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:18:07 -0800
- Thread-index: AcGIf1bvedJaht8zTdushVGgXSRKRgAQVrnA
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Suggestion for an alternative XML 1.1
> anyone cared. If people started receiving XML files with NEL in them,
> it probably would be changed.
That's my take on the whole NEL, CR, CRLF, LF thing too. Many text
editors today support the Windows and Unix conventions. There are still
a number of text editors that do *not*, but it is reasonable to assume
that most programmers will be able to figure out how to open any XML 1.0
file and view it properly. This would not have been true 12 years ago,
but text editors have had time to "catch up" with the mixing of DOS and
Unix text files. Also, this would *not* be true today if XML 1.0
permitted NEL. So XML 1.0 seems like a trade-off between supporting the
most originating platforms and supporting the most consumer developers.
Maybe one day a larger portion of the text editors that people commonly
use will support NEL. (Incidentally, I bet 12 years ago more of them
*did*)
|
