Re: [xml-dev] hackable xml

["Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>]

Original Message From: "Amelia A Lewis"

>> 4. Encoding must be UTF-8 (or some similar rule: its to remove the
>> potential mismatch between the encoding in the prolog and the actual
>> encoding)
>
> "   "
>
> Oh, hell, let's just make 'em all use ASCII, why not?

What real benefit do you get by allowing people to use UTF-16 LE/BE,
Shift-JIS, EBCIDIC etc?  The benefit doesn't seem to justify the cost to me.

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using XML C++
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Amelia A Lewis" <amyzing@talsever.com>
To: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
Cc: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] hackable xml


>
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:08:24 +0100, Andrew Welch wrote:
>> 2. Entity refs no longer exist, other than the inbuilt ones.  There is
>> no DTD.  (numeric refs remain)
>
> If the inbuilt ones exist, why:
>> 5. Lone inbuilt entites such as "&" in the lexical XML are
>> automatically parsed as &amp; and not an error (#2 above might enable
>> this). Same goes for a lone "<".
>
> And what does 'lone "<"' mean, anyway?  <element name="example">if (A <
> B) && (B > C) {...}</element
>
> Abandoning well-formedness in the name of simplicity is almost
> certainly the wrong approach to take.
>
> Without CDATA and entities, how do I supply an example of this syntax
> in the syntax?  <![CDATA[Encode & as &amp;]] and < as &lt;> [xml
> variant 1] == "Encode &amp; as &amp;amp; and &lt; as &amp;lt;" [xml
> variant 2] == "Encode & as &amp;amp; and < as &amp;lt;" [consequence of
> making & == &amp; in this definition?]
>
> That's not simpler, that's more complex, and in theory more forgiving
> of "common errors".
>
>> 3. PIs, CDATA sections gone
>
> No stylesheets.
>
>> 4. Encoding must be UTF-8 (or some similar rule: its to remove the
>> potential mismatch between the encoding in the prolog and the actual
>> encoding)
>
> "   "
>
> Oh, hell, let's just make 'em all use ASCII, why not?
>
>> been involved with.  I have never, ever, seen 2 prefixes with
>> different namespaces in the same document.  There is no need to map a
>
> Heh.  I have, often enough.
>
>> prefix to a namespace, the prefix provides all the uniqueness
>> necessary within a domain, global uniqueness isn't needed.  This would
>
> ?  So, how big is the domain?
>
>> to make it "hackable" by the masses, keeping mixed content and
>> attributes, the reason why you would use xml in the first place.
>
> Is it?
>
>> The need is there - is there a reason why this can't be done?
>
> Based on the above, I don't think you're going to build momentum.  What
> you want and what I want, for instance, seem to be rather different
> (I'd like to see a less baroque "namespaces in XML", and XML entity
> definition without DTDs; abandoning well-formedness constraints strikes
> me as a bad idea introducing too much ambiguity; removing choice of
> encoding is equally wrong-headed, I believe, and making XPath simpler
> won't help if the common host languages for XPath are no longer
> referenceable via standard mechanisms such as a stylesheet PI).
>
> Amy!
> -- 
> Amelia A. Lewis                    amyzing {at} talsever.com
> Do you ever feel like putting your fist through a window just so you
> can feel something?
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
>