Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 01:17:07AM +0900, MURATA Makoto wrote: > Since CR and LF are normalized to CRLF by the XML parser, how can you > expect fidelity? Allowing C0 control functions to not provide any > fidelity. It merely causes problems. Many of the SOAP toolkits preserve fidelity by serializing CR as &#d; and LF as LF. That way no normalization occurs and the data is kept intact. A useful trick. XML fidelity of CRLF sequences are only an issue because they are stated to be an issue in the XML spec. That is, the XML spec says CRLF translates to LF. Since XML does not talk about any other translations, there are no other XML fidelity issues with C0 or C1 control functions. The issue seems to be that XML documents are used within *other* systems and protocols, and the other systems and protocols might stuff things up (eg: C programs tend to use NUL to indicate the end of a string, a printer might use CTRL-D's between print jobs, an OS might use ^Z to indicate end of file etc). Alan
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