Re: Ten Years Later - XML 1.0 Fifth Edition?
On 18/02/2008, Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@r...> wrote: > Why do all this work? A character is a character is a character, except > for certain well known ranges. The more we try to interpret the more > obscure characters, the more trouble we get into. > > Besides, some of the musical symbols might make perfect sense as tag > names. Suppose I want to show all the occurrences of a given musical > symbol in a score, I could use that symbol as the name of an element, > and use child elements to contain each position. I agree, but personally I would like the characters used to appear on my keyboard. I would much rather someone used the name of the symbol rather than the symbol itself, if only to make processing it easier. For example - <â«>/<âª> would you expect everyone that processes it to look at the underlying bytes to work out exactly what character it is, then use that character or a character ref in the xpath or match pattern. Much better to use <beamed-eighth>/<eighth> isn't it? I would say allow any character in the XML, but keep name characters reseved to those on a keyboard. -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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