Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
David Brownell wrote: > Crimson augments some version of Unicode rules (java.lang.Character, as > specified in the Java language spec) with special cases as identified in the > XML 1.0 spec ... so if Java changes its level of Unicode conformance, that > parser's behavior will. It was conformant to Appendix B a while back. > > AElfred2 uses java.lang.Character directly, and doesn't try to add all the > funky special cases. That suits its original "mostly correct, but simple" > goals, but leads to mild nonconformance (nobody's complained!) for > Appendix B rules about what can be name/namestart characters. > > I don't know what Xerces does, but when I first looked it the character > processing was incomprehensible, also nonconformant. I understand > that the current versions are merely incomprehensible ... :) In short, parsers often don't get name conformance right, and changing the rules will not affect them much: broken remains broken. > p.s. Here's a radical thought. Rather than death by a thousand cuts, > why not just come out with a DTD-less XML? One big change, > not lots of small ones -- easier to manage such changes. If you want SML, you know where to find it. -- There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@r...> no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein
|
