relax UTF-8 default? was: Towards XML 2.0
Does newXML being treatable as a string mean the *UTF-8 default* requirement is better relaxed in some way? I mean, a developer writing a string doesn't want to have to ensure it is all written in UTF-8 do they? They might be happy enough to escape the special XML characters (<,>,",& and maybe in some cases ' too) but to have to worry about whether a 'pounds sterling' symbol is ISO-8859-1 or or not is probably going to be more than they can bear (without a pay rise!). OK, so removing this UTF-8 default might be a breaking change but if it removes what might be a major stumbling block isn't it worthwhile? Or would relaxing this either a) not solve their problem or b) create a worse problem which can't be solved another way? Why can't tools just work out from either the context or the text itself (or file) what the encoding is (doesn't a simple tool like Notepad do this?). ---- Stephen D Green On 8 December 2010 10:03, Andrew Welch <email@example.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 20:25 -0500, Kurt Cagle wrote: >>> That's one of the central problems with any solution of getting XML on >>> the browser > > For me "getting XML on the browser" isn't the goal.. it's making XML > easier to work with for the average dev - the reading and writing of > config files, generating the intermediate formats etc. > > The typical problems that I see that frustrate people to point of > hating XML are just because they've treated it as a string - encoding > issues, broken namespaces, lone amperstands and left angle brackets > etc. What appears to be a simple change to the file (say using a > regex) breaks it completely, and for encoding issues this can be a > real pain to track down. > > I've spent so much time telling people "you can't treat xml as a > string" and then tried to explain some ways to do the update... people > lose interest quickly when faced with SAX (try teaching SAX to someone > to make a small change to a config file!), then get confused later > when I mention Saxon, they really don't want to learn a new language > like XSLT or XQuery, then there's JDOM or XOM or DOM... all options, > all come with yet more libraries to add to the project. > > Perhaps I'm missing the golden simple way and a helpful teaching > manner, but I can see the will to live draining from their eyes as I > talk XMLFilterImpl and buffering the Characters... > > The 'next xml' needs to be treatable as a string... JSON is just a > string, right? > > > -- > Andrew Welch > http://andrewjwelch.com > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS > to support XML implementation and development. To minimize > spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. > > [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ > Or unsubscribe: firstname.lastname@example.org > subscribe: email@example.com > List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php > >
[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