• To: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
• From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:27:24 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20040121130907.GN20761@m...>
• References: <20030420212424.77D5824AEB6@m...><p0601020bbc330bbad09a@[192.168.254.4]><1074680678.400e53666dcf0@82.195.128.192><p06010202bc3414d0f2c8@[192.168.254.4]><20040121130907.GN20761@m...>

At 8:09 AM -0500 1/21/04, John Cowan wrote:

>Your more moderate remarks in "Fifty Ways To Lose Your XML Virginity"
>have my full support, but I really do resent the word "abomination".
>Perhaps I shall have to issue a rogue patch for XOM....

That's doable but trickier than you might think. There are a lot of 
place scattered throughout the XOM code base where there's an 
implicit assumption of XML 1.0.
-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   elharo@m...
   Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA

• References:
  • Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: re: genx
• Next by Date: Re: Genx
• Previous by thread: Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
• Next by thread: Multiple HTML files
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread