Lists Home |
Date Index |
> But of course an XML 1.0-only parser cannot generate the correct
> infoset for all such documents, because of the changed whitespace
> rules. And it may generate an infoset for a document that doesn't
> have one if XML 1.1 is not a superset of 1.0 (eg if it makes
> unnormalized unicode a well-formedness error).
> This might be taken as an argument for requiring 1.0 parsers to reject
> 1.1 documents.
I see that erratum E38 to the XML 1.0 Rec removed the prescription that it
is an error to use the wrong version number in the XML declaration. If that
will be the same in XML 1.1, at least it will be legal for a 1.1 processor
to say that a document is version 1.0 if in fact it does not use any of the
changed characters. This may become a normal thing to do.
It used to be an error to use "version 1.0" if a document did not conform to
the 1.0 Rec. I think that a number of parsers interpreted that to mean that
only "version 1.0" is allowed in the declaration. Like it or not, we are
going to have those parsers in service for a long time.
Too bad the only choice is to omit the whole prolog if your versoin number
would cause trouble, because if you omit it you cannot specify the encoding.