• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• To: jcowan@r...
• Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 00:51:46 +0100 (BST)

>Read it more closely.  The *characters* (i.e. non-markup) returned
>to the application are *as if* all CRs and CRLFs had been changed
>to LFs before parsing.
>
>That means a parser can keep the original representation right up to
>the moment it is creating a DOM Text node or invoking the
>SAX characters callback, at which point CRs that do not come from
>character references must be removed or changed to LFs.  Since CR is 
>allowed in the S production, any CR characters in markup need not
>be removed or changed.

Are you suggesting that if NEL were added to the translated line-end
characters, but not to the S production, this would not be sufficient
to make

  <fooNELa="1">

(where NEL represents the character) legal?

-- Richard

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Closing Blueberry
    • From: Rob Lugt <roblugt@e...>

• References:
  • Re: Closing Blueberry
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: "closed groups" (was RE: Blueberry is not "closed")
• Next by Date: Re: XML Print Publishing Systems?
• Previous by thread: Re: Closing Blueberry
• Next by thread: Re: Closing Blueberry
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread