[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 4:41 PM +0200 9/28/02, Julian Reschke wrote:
>Yes, I agree that the transition from XML 1.0 to XML 1.1 is more serious for
>*XML processors*. However, I'm talking about *applications*. Applications
>will not be concerned at all about changes in whitespace handling, nor will
>the extension of valid name characters likely cause any problems (it's just
>that "more" Unicode characters are allowed). On the other hand, allowing
>non-ASCII characters in namespace names *is* going to create problems,
>because there is deployed code which relies on URI syntax for namespace
>names.
OK. That is a significant difference. I'm still not sure how
widespread it is in practice.
>As the switch to IRIs doesn't seem to be motivated by the requirements
>document, I'd at least like to see the *rational* for this incompatible
>change (there *is* a requirement to keep the changes minimal: "The changes
>required for Namespaces in XML 1.0 processors to also process Namespaces in
>XML 1.1 must be as few and as small as possible.").
Based on past experience, I suspect you'll find that somebody has
decided it is immoral to make Chinese/Frehcnh/Arabic/etc. speakers
use ASCII for namespace URIs.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
