• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: XML versions and conformance (was RE: We need SAX featuresto say a parser supports XML)
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:34:21 -0400
• In-reply-to: <p04330108b9df1188021b@[192.168.254.4]>

10/25/2002 11:35:05 AM, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...> wrote:

> It will just be one big, 
>honking mess that confuses everyone who isn't enamored of language 
>law.

It's par for the course and will be ignored by those who use XML for
real work :-) 

Seriously, my impression is that the actual conformance to every detail in the
spec by actual parsers is somewhat lax, and that most people have learned
to shy away from the bleeding edge, so very few end users are going to be 
hurt by the errata, by XML 1.1, etc. I'd be interested in being proven wrong ...

• References:
  • RE: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Next by Date: RE: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Previous by thread: RE: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Next by thread: Re: We need SAX features to say a parser supports XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread