[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Two mistakes found in XML 1.1 Proposed Recommendation
Anti-disclaimer: For once, I am actually speaking for the W3C XML Core WG. Two mistakes have been found in the XML 1.1 PR: (1) Between CR and PR a technical change was made to the way in which control characters are excluded from XML documents. This was not meant to change the intention of the specification, just to fix a bug in the way the productions worked. One of the changes needed to achieve this was inadvertently omitted: Production 1 (document) should have been modified in the same way as production 78 (extParsedEnt), but was not. It will be changed to restore the intended meaning. (2) As stated in section 1.3 (Rationale for XML 1.1), XML 1.0 and 1.1 documents are distinguished by the version number in the XML declaration. It is important that the version of an XML document is well-defined, so documents without an XML declaration should continue be interpreted as version 1.0. Unfortunately, production 22 (prolog) of XML 1.1 leaves the XML declaration optional (as it was in XML 1.0). Production 22 will be changed to make the XML declaration required in XML 1.1, so that documents without XML declarations are unambiguously XML 1.0 documents. The examples at the beginning of section 2.8 will also be changed to make this clear. Thanks to Richard Tobin for this wording. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan <jcowan@r...> You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! `Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
|
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
|