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

Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft

• To: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
• Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:57:55 -0500
• References: <5C39F806F9939046B4B1AFE652500A3A251950@R...> <3C20DF04.3050209@d...> <021301c188cb$08070160$0a2e249b@n...> <3C20FA7D.10801@d...>

Eric van der Vlist wrote:


> Jonathan Borden wrote:
>
> > Eric van der Vlist wrote:
>
> >>The problem seems to be that this TEXT doesn't enter into the definition
> >>of text made in XML 1.0, but it should be possible to represent it
> >>differently using what we have at hand.
> >>
> >
> > Isn't that what character references are for? You already need to escape
> > characters such as single and/or double quotes, < & etc, so
adding a
> > few numbers to a case statement doesn't seem to be a huge deal.
>
>
> Not really. The character references are equivalent to the characters
> which they replace and thus it seems difficult to use them to replace
> characters which are forbidden...
>

Hmmph... well I don't profess to understand much of this character stuff,
but it seemed to me logical that character refs would be a good way to
escape characters not otherwise allowed in text ... I'm sure there is a good
reason why this isn't allowed -- I mean it does let me stuff an < into an
attribute, so what is the huge difference between that and � ? Oh well,
I never should have piped in on this thread anyways...

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
  • Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • RE: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: "Michael Rys" <mrys@m...>
  • Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
  • Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
• Next by Date: Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
• Previous by thread: Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
• Next by thread: Re: Some comments on the 1.1 draft
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread