Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
Mike Champion wrote: > [Wondering what Microsoft put the in beer at XML 2002 last week ... I > can't believe I'm arguing on the side of the Borg twice in one week ;-) ] > > This seems perfectly sensible to me. Not to me. It's a bug in System.Xml. > It's a way for vendors to say "we > support the standards as written, but we encourage our customers to use > the profiles that avoid the ratholes ." I don't think this bug is documented as a feature in System.Xml, but I'll go back and check this evening. > Also, I'm sure it is no > coincidence that .NET's XML tools appear to be focused on the subset of > XML that SOAP employs. I haven't heard any noises that say the .NET library only supports a certain subset of XML. > This subset/profiling issue, and why SOAP uses a > subset of XML, was a hot topic on the TAG list over the last couple of > weeks, so people might want to look through the archives to get a sense > of what the "other side" (whichever side you are on) has to say. What's interesting to me is why the SOAP community/vendors/wg aren't pushing to specify a new version of XML (ie, a separate document from a seperate working group). Or have they? Bill de hÓra -- Propylon www.propylon.com
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