RE: Lotsa laughs
Hi Chris, You said: > What it is doing is taking content which is *not* in conformance with > either the W3C Character Model or RFC2396, and silently fixing it up so > that it *does* conform when dereferencing URLs. > This is supposed to happen on authoring (so the content is valid), not > as a form of retrospective error correction. reply: This reminds me of IETF arguments we got several years ago. a) If we impose to the author that a URL is well formed and correctly encoded. This means that any URL entered in the address box (an authoring tool) should be correctly encoded. Is this realistic? b) What is the difference between the two authoring tools a) the address box, b) a HTML editor. You can say that both should correct the encoding by replacing " " by "%20". Then, it seems that the biztalk author has a bad authoring tool. It remains that a good browser should try to recover as much as possible from the errors created by authors (and if possible correct). The best thing is to help us by reporting the problem to Mozilla.org so that this deficiency is corrected. regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@n... http://www.netfolder.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/ 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