Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 07:19:09AM -0700, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> 1.) XML's treatment of whitespace confuses developers. As Derek says,
> Microsoft tried to make the behavior more intuitive which has made
> MSXML vilified by XML pendants [...]
If the spec is confusing, the right approach is not to implement it
differently and incompatibly. The right approach is to help get the
spec clarified, or to provide tools and documentation to help your
users. Calling people names because they want the spec implemented
correctly misses the point of why we have industry standards.
> 2.) The limitation in the range of allowed characters in XML is a
> hassle which the Microsoft XML team sees customers complain about on a
> weekly basis.
W3C heard that too.
XML 1.1 increases the range, and Microsoft was well represented in
the XML Core Working Group that produced it. From what you are
saying I'd expect rapid deployment of XML 1.1 from Microsoft, yes?
> 3.) Namespaces are close to a disaster [but not quite, that dubious
> honor goes to W3C XML Schema]
There's nothing specific here to comment on...
Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/