[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 10:14 AM -0400 10/25/02, John Cowan wrote:
>Read the errata page.
Oh joy. Another erratum that rewrites history because the working
group changed its mind. Sorry. I don't accept such errata as
normative. The spec is clear an unambiguous. There is no plausible
argument that the original spec made a mistake. The people who wrote
the spec knew what they were writing and why they were writing it.
Now, retroactively, somebody's decided they were wrong, and they're
going to fix it.
Sorry. This can't be done in an erratum. XML 1.0 says what it says.
Parsers are designed around it. If you're going to change the BNF
grammar, then you've invented a new language. XML 1.0 plus errata is
no longer XML 1.0. It is provably true that
<?xml version="1.1"?><root />
is a well-formed XML 1.0 document.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| 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/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
