• From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:24:57 +0100

On 17/07/11 11:21, Olivier Jeulin wrote:
> Le 17/07/2011 00:18, Richard Salz a �crit :
>> Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote on 07/16/2011 03:32:16 PM:
>> > or it could allow "&" to represent itself if not followed
>> > by a name character.
>>
>> Then whitespace becomes significant
>> foo<bar
>> foo < bar
>> foo< bar
>> foo <bar
>
> It is already. To define a start tag, "<" can't be followed by a space "
> ", so
> foo < bar
> foo< bar
> could (and I think should) be valid XML

But this *is* valid SGML.

<!doctype text [
<!element text - - (#pcdata)>
]>
<text>
foo < bar
   foo< bar
</text>

This was one of the complexities of SGML that was removed to make XML, 
in order to *make it easier to write parser/validators*. There were lots 
more, and I'm sure no-one involved at that stage would claim that 
everything was got right. Don't forget that XML was designed for *text 
documents*; any other use was either an afterthought or simply Not Yet 
Invented.

///Peter

• References:
  • Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Joe Fawcett <joefawcett@h...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Richard Salz <rsalz@u...>
  • Re: Error and Fatal Error
    • From: Olivier Jeulin <olivier.jeulin@g...>