• To: "'John Cowan'" <jcowan@r...>,"'Rick Jelliffe'" <ricko@a...>
• Subject: RE: version numbers and infosets
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:30:48 +0100
• Cc: <www-xml-blueberry-comments@w...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200207261437.KAA25077@m...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> 
> > Why not try that minimal solution first, and see if it works?
> > 
> > (And why not do it as a corrigendum rather than 1.1)
> 
> I keep telling you why.  Because it changes the definition of 
> well-formedness. A document like "<foo<NEL>bar=baz> is not WF 
> XML 1.0, but it is WF XML 1.1.
> 
You could do it without changing the definition of well-formedness by
saying that the set of characters considered to be whitespace, and
normalized as such, is a property of the encoding.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@n...
work: Michael.Kay@s... 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: version numbers and infosets
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: version numbers and infosets
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: sax parser and xpath
• Next by Date: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Previous by thread: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Next by thread: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread