• From: "David Brownell" <david-b@p...>
• To: "Rick JELLIFFE" <ricko@g...>, <xml-editor@w...>, <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:44:02 +0200

> Instead, I would propose another level of validity "character validity"
> which XML processors should be encouraged, but not required, to support,
> or to support as much as they can. Unlike validity, which sits on top
> of well-formedness, "character validity" sits more-or-less underneath
> well-formedness as XML's soft underbelly.

AAck!!  NO!!  Unneeded complexity, leading to interop bugs.

- Dave



***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• References:
  • Possible changes for XML 2nd Edition
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • Re: Possible changes for XML 2nd Edition
    • From: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Test suite suggestion
• Next by Date: Re: Possible changes for XML 2nd Edition
• Previous by thread: Re: Possible changes for XML 2nd Edition
• Next by thread: Re: Possible changes for XML 2nd Edition
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread