Good point. Perhaps I'd be willing to accept having to write
xml-well-formed comments. My main concern is with being able to
"disable" (comment out) a large portion of a well-formed document
without having to be concerned whether it contains comments or not. In
that case, comments would be well-formed, so not an issue really.
-Mike
On 12/5/2010 4:10 AM, Greg Hunt wrote:
> So you are suggesting that something that looks like an element is
> parsed differently to other things that look like elements? Is "can't
> expect well-formedness" entirely wise?
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:48 AM, Michael Sokolov<> wrote:
>> On 12/4/2010 10:39 PM, Ben Trafford wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 22:16 -0500, Kurt Cagle wrote:
>>>> For a comment syntax, what's wrong with
>>>> <xml:comment>....</xml:comment>?
>>>>
>>>> But that's ... that's ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's actually a very decent idea.
>>> I'll third that.
>>>
>>> --->Ben
>> metoo, but let's please allow for nesting this time. Extremely useful, and
>> not too hard to implement if you parse the contents of the comment loosely
>> (can't expect well-formedness, but can just search for</xml:comment\s*>)
>>
>> -Mike
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>
>> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
>> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
>> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>>
>> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
>> Or unsubscribe:
>> subscribe:
>> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>>
>>
