OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Ten Years Later - XML 1.0 Fifth Edition?

Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2008, at 04:00, Elliotte Harold wrote:
>>> (I still have yet to meet one single actual user who needs XML 1.1.)
> Please read http://rishida.net/blog/?p=135

That's theoretical. Note he doesn't say he actually needs any of these 
characters himself, nor does he say he's met any users who do.

I reiterate: I have yet to hear from or of one single person who wants a 
character added in XML 1.1.

Probably there is someone out there somewhere, or may one day be, but 
the fact that there isn't even one yet (and I've looked) indicates that 
the need for this is miniscule. It's just not worht the cost of the change.

Now, as I've said before, if we could eliinate the actively bad ideas 
from XML 1.1 like allowing undefined characters in names and NEL, and if 
we could offer other benefits to real, non-theoretical users to offset 
the costs of a transition, then we might as well go ahead and add the 
new name characters through Unicode 5 in a putative XML 2.0. However, 
absent some other compelling benefit, the costs are just way too high. 
And there's certainly no excuse for breaking the W3C process to enable 
these characters few if any individuals actually want or need.

Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published!

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS