Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
Eric van der Vlist wrote: > Jonathan Borden wrote: > > > Eric van der Vlist wrote: > > >>The problem seems to be that this TEXT doesn't enter into the definition > >>of text made in XML 1.0, but it should be possible to represent it > >>differently using what we have at hand. > >> > > > > Isn't that what character references are for? You already need to escape > > characters such as single and/or double quotes, < & etc, so adding a > > few numbers to a case statement doesn't seem to be a huge deal. > > > Not really. The character references are equivalent to the characters > which they replace and thus it seems difficult to use them to replace > characters which are forbidden... > Hmmph... well I don't profess to understand much of this character stuff, but it seemed to me logical that character refs would be a good way to escape characters not otherwise allowed in text ... I'm sure there is a good reason why this isn't allowed -- I mean it does let me stuff an < into an attribute, so what is the huge difference between that and � ? Oh well, I never should have piped in on this thread anyways... Jonathan
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