Hi Robin,
Le 18/12/2009 15:58, Robin Berjon a écrit :
On Dec 18, 2009, at 13:25 , Cyril Concolato wrote:
For "space characters", why did you add U+000B and U+000C?
I think this question is even more important if you note that XHTML 1 indicates
that U+000C is an invalid XML char (see http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_15)
I don't think that looking at XHTML is the best idea if you want a normative
definition for XML :)
I agree but the XML spec is so indigestible sometimes that it's hard to find
the proper info. It was a bit digested in XHTML :)
U+000C is indeed forbidden in XML 1.0 (all editions) but is allowed (IIRC only
as a numeric character reference) in XML 1.1.
P+C doesn't tie processors to a particular version of XML, and lists its white
space characters accordingly (and defensively). If you're certain that you will
only ever get content that comes from a conforming XML 1.0 implementation, then
you probably don't need to check for this.
I don't read it like that. P&C explicitely references XML 1.0 and never
mentions 1.1. So I thought the behavior was conformant to 1.0. It's fine if the
spec also handles 1.1 but it should be mentioned. Also the rationale for the
choices of space characters should also be indicated and the differences between
XML 1.0 and XML 1.1 should be present.
Cyril
--
Cyril Concolato
Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor
Groupe Mutimedia/Multimedia Group
Telecom ParisTech
46 rue Barrault
75 013 Paris, France
http://concolato.blog.telecom-paristech.fr/
