[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Editing text
> From: James Clark <jjc@j...> > I think it would be better if well-formedness allowed simple tokenizing > to be used, and the detailed checking of name characters was needed only > for validity, but that's not how the spec is currently. That sounds sensible: any chance of it James? It was discussed before, but in the salad days of case insensitity. There have been several proposals for what grain the naming rules should have: opinions range from "allow nearly everything" to "the grain of Unicode blocks" to "whatever Unicode says for identifiers" to "whatever the new ISO report on identifiers says" to "whatever the Java function does" to "almost nothing: just ASCII" to "lets look at each character individually and judge". Having quite a large grain (e.g., divide Unicode into 256 rows and disable or allow whole rows {but with special treatment for row 0}) also gets the SGML declaration into a less daunting size. This might be be good enough namechecking for XML, in line with the 80% rule. Rick Jelliffe xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
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
|