Re: [xml-dev] MicroXML and &

Original Message From: "Mike Sokolov"

> On 6/1/2012 10:25 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote:racter References instead.)
>> Right. If we want minimal (micromal?) why have to ways of saying "<"?
>>
>> Liam
>>
> I think the major confusion around entities always arose from their 
> connection to DTDs. Having given up DTDs, MicroXML can then choose to 
> build in some predefined entity definitions, or not.  It seems like a 
> small issue?  But on the whole I think it would cause *more* confusion 
> rather than less to drop &lt and &amp.  People are probably more familiar 
> with those than with the numeric references. Just a feeling.

I agree that &lt; &amp; &quot; and &apos; need to be kept from a usability 
point of view.

Part of me would like to drop &gt; after a customer complained that we 
didn't use it in place of > and the remote system they were talking to 
rejected it.  But maybe that's more motivated by revenge and is a step too 
far!

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info