Re: Production 78 / Process failure in XML 1.1
Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit: > If the intent was to prevent restricted chars from appearing > literally, I agree that this would have been an editorial change, not > a substantive one and not a process violation. Good. > However, as actually > written I don't think the spec does forbid restricted chars in the > document entity, I'm inclined to agree, but I may be overlooking something. > and I'm not convinced it forbids them in external > parsed entities. (I'm not sure about that. Maybe production 78 can be > construed to indicate that, but it's not obvious to me. I think that > <element>#x07 and lots of other restricted chars here</element> does > satisfy production 78.) The BNF notation a - b used in the XML Rec means "anything which matches a but does not match b". Your sample document clearly does match Char* RestrictedChar Char*, and as such cannot match production 78. > If the intent was to forbid literal restricted chars, then perhaps > all that's needed is a 2nd PR that makes the necessary editorial > fixes to say what was actually intended, and you can avoid going back > to last call. I'll defer this to experts in W3C process. -- John Cowan jcowan@r... www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan I am he that buries his friends alive and drowns them and draws them alive again from the water. I came from the end of a bag, but no bag went over me. I am the friend of bears and the guest of eagles. I am Ringwinner and Luckwearer; and I am Barrel-rider. --Bilbo to Smaug
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