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

Re: UTF-8+names

• To: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: UTF-8+names
• From: "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>
• Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:08:46 -0400
• References: <3F917A29.1000708@t...>

From: "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...>
>
> Check out http://tbray.org/tag/utf-8+names.html

Instead of throwing an error for a missing semicolon, why not let that case
fall under section 4.  Since the set of pre-defined reference names are
known, you also know the maximum length possible.  If you reach length+1
characters, you know it's not a reference and leave it as-is.  It also means
that a lone ampersand won't be an error.  I suspect the motivation to
require the semicolon is for consistency with XML's same requirements.
However, this disallows some valid UTF-8 from being valid UTF-8+names as
well.  While this may be fine if used solely within the context of XML
(which would throw an error as soon as it hit the invalid reference anyhow),
I suspect people will try using this outside of XML as well.

Also, I suspect that using the same format as XML/SGML's references is going
to confuse people.  Maybe use a similary format such as #name; or @name;.
This way, at least the two references (UTF-8+name and XML) would not be
confused.

---
Seairth Jacobs (seairth@s...)
Looking: http://www.seairth.com/blog/65

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • RE: UTF-8+names
    • From: "Alessandro Triglia" <sandro@m...>

• References:
  • UTF-8+names
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The power of Openoffice.org, XML, the Unix toolkit, and a little hacking
• Next by Date: [ANN] EXSLT.NET v1.0
• Previous by thread: Re: UTF-8+names
• Next by thread: RE: UTF-8+names
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread