[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I also saw mentioning limiting depth of documents, do you believe limiting
width also?? You can have
<!ELEMENT a b*>
which can be potentially infinite..
best regards,
murali.
I think it is argument of engineering based on current experiences, hoping
that it will hold for ever/reasonably long time. Even I am not sure if we
should have such limits in standards.
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, David Megginson wrote:
> Rick Marshall writes:
>
> > that's what ibm said 20 years ago and every design since has had to
> > cope with 640k base memory ranges and other "that'll be more than
> > enough" decisions.
>
> I understand that argument well, but in this case, we're not talking
> about limiting the overall length of XML documents. Let's try not to
> imagine only the present, but the future as well -- can anyone make a
> reasonable case for an XML element or attribute name longer than 4096
> characters (for example)?
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> David
|
