• From: Peter Flynn <peter@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 10:54:06 +0000

On 09/12/10 05:37, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> I'm with you most of the way; can I slip in a couple more additions (and
> a few cavils)?
> 
> I think this tiny change would be new to this discussion (and easy to
> implement and backwards compatible since it doesn't affect
> well-formedness?): let's not mandate line-terminator normalization. 

By all means, so long as the facility for normalization in circumstances
where it is required doesn't get thrown out as well.

///Peter

• References:
  • nextml
    • From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>
  • Re: nextml
    • From: Michael Sokolov <sokolov@i...>