Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Michael Kay wrote: >This is not an erratum. It is a change proposal. > Since there is no corrigendum category at W3C, it is the only bucket. I guess my view of what a change may be different from yours, because for the last couple of years almost all the XML programming I have had to do for our products involved making non-standard parsers, to help bring in information to let people make it WF or Valid. At the moment, people create XML tools that are complete crap for repairing non-WF XML. SAX provides a mechanism for features to be added to XML processors to overcome problems in various ways; for example, my company implemented a feature to ignore entity references. So I don't believe my proposal is a change in the sense of legitimating things that people don't do anyway: people do "change" XML, especially for repair or import tools. My proposal doesn't change WF or valid; it just sanctions at least one way of processing "not well-formed but processed" documents to cope with a particular problem at the start of the food chain. It just encourages repair tools. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
