On 08/10/18 23:56, John Cowan wrote:
> It was a collection of fixes to XML 1.0 none of which was in itself
> sufficiently compelling to justify a new and incompatible version. The
> feature I considered the most important, ditching Unicode 2.0 in favor of
> an evolving set of characters for element and attribute names (as well as
> the values of non-CDATA attributes), was incorporated into the 5th Edition
> of XML 1.0.
That's actually problematic all by itself. Parsers have no way of
telling from the data they've been presented which characters are valid.
--
Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
