[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)

• From: <david@m...>
• To: XML Dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 22:11:30 -0500 (EST)

Chris Lovett writes:

 > It doesn't make any sense to think of the contents of a CDATA section in
 > terms of "replacement-text" because then you'd have to wonder about
 > validating <![CDATA[<b/><c/>]]> which was NOT the point of CDATA sections.
 > The point of CDATA was to treat <b/><c/> as UNPARSED text.

Precisely -- it's a matter of escaping.  That doesn't really solve the 
first problem, though, since validation can (must?) take place after
delimiter recognition.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
    • From: Chris Lovett <clovett@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Next by Date: RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Previous by thread: RE: CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)
• Next by thread: RE: Is XML 1.0 underspecified? (was: Re: CDATA by any other name...)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread