[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Michael Kay wrote:
>> I'm really not trying to beat a nearly-dead horse here (I
>> swear!), but the XML spec says in '2.6:
>> [17] PITarget ::= Name - (('X' | 'x') ('M' | 'm') ('L' | 'l'))
>
> This rule says that the name XML in any combination of upper-or-lower case
> is forbidden. There's a rule elsewhere that says names starting with "xml"
> are reserved for future standardization.
> Some parsers will give you a warning if you use such names;
Do they? And if in fact a few to name do, with what reason?
rolf
Re: [xsl] document() function and error-handling
Subject: Re: [xsl] document() function and error-handling From: Rolf Ade <rolf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 04:39:00 +0100 |
Michael Kay wrote:
>> I'm really not trying to beat a nearly-dead horse here (I
>> swear!), but the XML spec says in '2.6:
>> [17] PITarget ::= Name - (('X' | 'x') ('M' | 'm') ('L' | 'l'))
>
> This rule says that the name XML in any combination of upper-or-lower case
> is forbidden. There's a rule elsewhere that says names starting with "xml"
> are reserved for future standardization.
That's getting off-topic and I already hear the barking. Though, and sorry, that's a bit wish-wash. I read the XML rec as Scott (and implemented that way) that the name XML in any combination of upper-or-lower case is forbidden. Longer names starting with the chars XML in any combination of upper-or-lower case are allowed by this rule. I'd love to see a reference to the "rule elsewhere". There's a rule, that every qname starting with a prefix xml isn't OK. But we're talking about a name here, not a qname. Isn't XML about to have a sharp sword to distinguish well-formed from not well-formed?
> Some parsers will give you a warning if you use such names;
Do they? And if in fact a few to name do, with what reason?
> and your application may break if W3C decides to attach a special > meaning to the name you have chosen for yourself. Since there's an > infinity of names that don't begin with "xml", it costs you nothing > to avoid this risk.
Sure. Nobody knows, what the w3c decide. But anyway. If everything else works, such a PI name isn't a problem now and the next future.
rolf
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] document() function and e, Michael Kay | Thread | RE: [xsl] document() function and e, Michael Kay |
RE: [xsl] document() function and e, Michael Kay | Date | RE: [xsl] document() function and e, Michael Kay |
Month |
Keywords