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

Re: Postel's law, exceptions

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Subject: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 14:22:33 -0500
• Cc: Michael Champion <mc@x...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <p06010202bc2c7ce1a5ac@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <p06010205bc2c4d3b7399@[192.168.254.4]> <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D10190E1B6@R... t.com> <CBA00C77-4638-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...> <864E88FE-4651-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...> <p06010205bc2c4d3b7399@[192.168.254.4]> <5.1.0.14.2.20040115101443.03f5f5e0@w...> <6A0EE7CA-4778-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...> <p06010202bc2c7ce1a5ac@[192.168.254.4]>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507

He goes a bit overboard, but Mark Pilgrim makes some good points:
    http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/01/14/thought_experiment
(What, Mark going overboard?  I'm shocked I say, shocked.)  Don't lose 
his point: it's not necessarily invalid markup, but different character 
encodings, too.

My view:  whenever Atom is carrying content, it should be possible to 
insert base-64-encoded content.  Then the Atom is pure XML, and the 
content is safely carried, leaving it for the poor user with their "tag 
soup" browser, or what have you, to deal with.  Luckily, you can do that 
with Atom.  Mark Nottingham is writing the strict RFC spec (using 
Marshall's tasteful RFC 2629 XML package); see 
http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-atom-format-02.html#rfc.section.3.1

	/r$

-- 
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview  http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • RE: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• References:
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: James Robertson <jarober@g...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by Date: RE: Postel's law, exceptions
• Previous by thread: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by thread: RE: Postel's law, exceptions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread