[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: How important are CDATA sections?
Paul Prescod writes: > > As XML evolves, I'd be happy to see CDATA disappear. XML doesn't > > need any syntax constructs only for the sake of > > convenience. That's what we have XML editors for. > > May Goldfarb save us from those who want to protect us from the > syntax by making the syntax so unbearable that we need protection! Seriously, CDATA sections were only a small part of a whole load of gratuitously obfuscated syntax carried over from SGML to XML 1.0 (as important as the syntax seemed at the time to us SGML types), but the cost of making major incompatible changes to XML now would far outweigh the benefits that we might get from pruning, so we'd best learn to live with it all. Let that be a warning to all future specification writers. All the best, David -- David Megginson, david@m..., http://www.megginson.com/
|
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
|