• From: Gavin McKenzie <gmckenzi@J...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 14:07:37 -0500

Folks,

After working with XML for the better portion of the last two years I am
somewhat embarassed about this...and I'm hoping that someone can give me an
opinion based on experience...

I thought that I understood the way the XML spec states that parsers are
required to convert all CR/LF pairs to simply LF.  But I've had that
understanding shaken when I was told by a co-worker that placing the CR/LF
pair in an XML file as character-entity references 
 results
in the parser *not* translating the pair to a LF.

So in summary, a CR/LF pair appears to be translated, while the
&#000D;&#000A; is not...right?

I've re-read the spec (especially sec 2.11), and the annotated
version...I've brushed up on the definition of a 'parsed-entity', and I'm
still unable to understand whether the reported behaviour of using character
entities to defeat the translation is correct; and if so, which magic words
in the spec (is it the repeated use of 'literal' in 2.11) cause the
behaviour of not translating the character-entity references to be correct.

Gavin.
 

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: More real-world XML
• Next by Date: RE: Musing over Namespaces
• Previous by thread: More real-world XML
• Next by thread: Very very preliminary doc about semantic name spaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread