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

Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1

• To: david@m...
• Subject: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 07:35:31 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <15795.58700.273172.273186@m...> from "david@m..." at Oct 21, 2002 07:30:20 AM

david@m... scripsit:

> This is a point where the original XML WG (I didn't join until after
> the 1.0 REC) deserves praise.  Assuming that the Ethiopian XML people
> include an XML declaration, their XML 1.1 documents will at least
> trigger obvious and properly documented failures in 1.0-only
> processors (along the lines of "Fatal: XML version 1.1 not supported")
> rather than intermittent, hard-to-track-down bugs and crashes.

So we hope, at least.  Yet the requirement for 1.0 parsers to accept
only things marked "1.0" (or not marked at all) is extremely recent.
Until then, XML 1.0 parsers were free to accept things that began
<?xml version="3.141592653.gibberish"?>.

-- 
John Cowan                                <jcowan@r...>     
http://www.reutershealth.com              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Yakka foob mog.  Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork.  Chumble spuzz.
    -- Calvin, giving Newton's First Law "in his own words"

• References:
  • Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
    • From: <david@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Next by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Previous by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread