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

Re: Towards XML 2.0

• From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
• To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
• Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 00:08:51 +0000

On 05/12/2010 22:20, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Michael Kay wrote:
>
>> For a comment syntax, what's wrong with<xml:comment>....</xml:comment>?
> Validation? In order to allow xml:comment to appear everywhere we would
> either to say that such element is stripped before validation or extend
> every existing schema to allow such element everywhere which is quite
> difficult in some schema languages (namely XSD 1.0).

I was assuming that if <xml:comment> were chosen to represent comments, 
its main (perhaps only) difference from other elements would be that it 
would be ignored for validation purposes - i.e it's not under schema 
control.

I've been interested to read people's views that comments should be 
allowed to contain "non-well-formed" content. It's a worthwhile point, 
but I don't find it compelling. The editing tool that creates the 
comment can always escape any markup within the comment.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>

• References:
  • Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@ibiblio.org>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@ibiblio.org>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@ibiblio.org>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
  • Re: Towards XML 2.0
    • From: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>