• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: Joel Rees <rees@m...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:16:31 -0700

At 11:43 PM 24/07/01 +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
>> . . . just *declaring* Blueberry -- and not
>> using any new feature, that older tools won't be able to handle it?
>
>A parser designed for XML 1.0 will do one of several things:

It depends how Blueberry is signaled.  If they change the
XML declaration to say 

<?xml version="1.0.1" ?> 

or some such, then the processor has wiggle room.  I have no
idea what the installed base of processors do in this case.

On the other hand, if they do something like

<?xml version="1.0" unicode="3.1.1" ?>

Then every XML processor in the world will correctly reject it.
Of course this second option is not viable if the W3C misguidedly 
lets NEL into the S production.  I must say it feels like a 
really clean use-unicode-by-reference approach. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • XML referencing (was Re: Blueberry is not "closed")
    • From: Joel Rees <rees@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: Joel Rees <rees@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Newbie - Schemas - Problem with minOccurs? or xmlns?
• Next by Date: RE: Newbie - Schemas - Problem with minOccurs? or xmlns?
• Previous by thread: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Next by thread: XML referencing (was Re: Blueberry is not "closed")
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread