• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• To: "ML XMLDev" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 19:03:07 +1100

 From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

>We have CDATA attribute content.  CDATA element content is B.A.D.
(broken
>as designed) in SGML because it terminates with the first </ -Tim

Too strong.  CDATA elements per se are not BAD. I have processed many
SGML documents with CDATA element types  and never had any problem.
They are just inappropriate for XML.

If one does not have structure-using tools (e.g.you are using sed rather
than OmniMark) then CDATA elements can sometimes cause a complication.
On the other hand, sometimes CDATA elements simplify matters: for
example, if you have a document of simple database fields, one per line:
for non CDATA elements you have to have more code, to handle possible
entity references.

The Desparate Perl Hacker (DPH) is certainly a good class of user for
XML to support. But being a DPH in a commercial company is probably a
sign of management or technical incompetence somewhere. Using the right
tools for the job is important in any trade.

Rick Jelliffe


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML - NG
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: DTD vs DCD vs Schema
• Next by Date: Re: XSchema suggestion/wish: Parameter entity (or SGML DTD inclusions/exclusions?) "equivalent"
• Previous by thread: Re: XML - NG
• Next by thread: Re: XML - NG
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread