Re: Confused about & in entity literal
> Yes I know that the ampersands should have been escaped technically, Why "technically"? If it wasn't meant to be an entity reference, the document is just plain wrong. If it *is* meant to be an entity reference, why is it any stranger than, say, <[128K of name characters]/> or any of the other places where a name occurs? > but how many parsers would blow up in this situation trying to > buffer up that much text? It's tempting to use fixed-size buffers for such things, but when I've done that in the past it's usually turned out to be a mistake. Have you found parsers that "blow up" in this case? Of course, an implementation is perfectly free to warn about absurdly long names. -- Richard 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 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...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format