Re: version numbers and infosets
From: "John Cowan" <jcowan@r...> > People use mainframes, and XML too. If XML 1.0 had insisted > that only CR-LF and LF were acceptable line terminators, don't you > think an argument based on justice for Mac users would have been > appropriate? No, supporting Mac-style line terminators does not need to grandized into an issue of justice (by which John means egalitiarianism, I think*) but * pragmatism: the number of people typing documents in editors on Macs is very large * operational considerations: a programmer generally has control over the line terminators they use, and mainframes are typically programmed * XML 1.0 was starting fresh, and therefore only had SGML and RFC compatability to cope with: XML 1.n must be a trade-off between the particular benefits and the costs in distruption. * CR and LF were in play any way, so a decision on how to support CR alone is necessary even as a matter of error handling * CR is part of ASCII, and so it is low-hanging fruit to adopt. * XML had the 80/20 rule, and I am not sure that NEL would have made it even if it into XML 1.0 in any case. NEL on the other hand is rare, specialist, non-ASCII, and not low-hanging fruit. > "It is intolerable to have no better reason for a legal rule than > that *thus* it was laid down in the time of King Henry the Second." For some reasons, see above. Cheers Rick Jelliffe * IMHO It is not injust if W3C were to decide on only ASCII characters in names, for example. But would be anti-egalitarian, and obviously bad for the market.
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