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

Re: Well-formed Blueberry

• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:37:04 -0400

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

 > I think there's a way to limit the damage this does to the existing
 > infrastructure. Whatever the eventual identifier is chosen for
 > Blueberry (version="1.1", unicode="3.1", etc.) I think it should be
 >  a *fatal error* to use this identifier in a document that does not
 >  actually use any of the newly introduced characters in an XML name
 >  somewhere.

The trouble with this scheme is that it makes generation on the fly,
particularly by separate modules, difficult.

 > In other words, if a document can be an XML 1.0 document, it must be
 >  an XML 1.0 document.

I would certainly agree that it SHOULD, but MUST seems a bit severe.

-- 
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

• References:
  • Re: participating communities (was XML Blueberry)
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Well-formed Blueberry
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Well-formed Blueberry
• Next by Date: RE: Well-formed Blueberry
• Previous by thread: Re: Well-formed Blueberry
• Next by thread: RE: participating communities (was XML Blueberry)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread