[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Michael Kay wrote:
>This is not an erratum. It is a change proposal.
>
Since there is no corrigendum category at W3C, it is the only bucket.
I guess my view of what a change may be different from yours, because
for the last couple of years almost all the XML programming I have
had to do for our products involved making non-standard parsers,
to help bring in information to let people make it WF or Valid.
At the moment, people create XML tools that are complete crap
for repairing non-WF XML. SAX provides a mechanism for
features to be added to XML processors to overcome problems
in various ways; for example, my company implemented a feature
to ignore entity references.
So I don't believe my proposal is a change in the sense of legitimating
things that people don't do anyway: people do "change" XML,
especially for repair or import tools. My proposal doesn't change
WF or valid; it just sanctions at least one way of processing
"not well-formed but processed" documents to cope with
a particular problem at the start of the food chain. It just encourages
repair tools.
Cheers
Rick Jelliffe
|
