On 27 January 2011 22:42, Michal Zalewski <lcamtuf@coredump.cx> wrote: > Many people proposed this, and it's a superior alternative on many > counts, but I think that nobody figured out a nice way to do this that > would be at least sort-of XML-compatible - and that's a > deal-breaker... > You've lost me there. Why could it not be made compatible with XML? All you need is a start and end it doesn't matter the format, once a start and end is defined the parser would start looking for the tokens first and any invalid injections inside could be removed or prevented from overlapping with other markers.
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 22:52:42 UTC