[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The XML 1.1 Candidate Recommendation is published
> No, not at all! XML 1.1 says that parsers should *check* normalization, > not that they should *perform* it. So a parser that sees an e followed > by a combining acute should report the lack of normalization to the > calling application. > > This is a most important distinction. XML *generators* should generate > normalized output; XML *accepters* should check normalization. I don't understand the need for normalization checking. The spec says this: <quote> The purpose of this section is to strongly encourage XML processors to ensure that the creators of XML documents have properly normalized them, so that XML applications can make tests such as identity comparisons of strings without having to worry about the different possible "spellings" of strings which Unicode allows. </quote> If Unicode allows strings to have different spellings, than this is a generic problem for all applications processing Unicode strings. So why add the extra complexity to an XML processor to check for normalization, so that an application that would normally treat Unicode strings in a standard way suddenly can do it differently, because the XML processor already takes care of part of it? I am sure there will be (or are) generic libraries for that kind of Unicode processing. To me this looks as if there is no proper "separation of concerns", i.e. an XML processor should not concern itself with the issue of normalization. It may, however, make sense for generating canonical XML. Karl
|
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
|