- From: Joe Gregorio <joe@bitworking.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:05:49 -0400
- To: "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@sun.com>
- Cc: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>, uri@w3.org
On 10/26/07, Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@sun.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 23, 2007, at 1:14 AM, Manger, James H wrote:
> >
> > The syntax is XML-friendly compared to Joe's. Joe's uses < > and &,
> > which require escaping in XML -- making templates more awkward to
> > read and write. < and > are already used as delimiters in HTTP
> > headers, particularly the proposed Link-Template header. There may
> > not be a clash if < and > only appear inside {…} within a template,
> > but it adds some confusion.
> >
> IMO, this is an important consideration. I think its highly likely
> that templates will be embedded in XML documents and having to escape/
> unescape delimiters in templates will be a pain.
This is a non issue.
Even if the <op>'s are changed to something more XML 'friendly'
you still have to escape because <arg> may contain & and ',
so you still have to escape. Also, let's look at the bigger picture:
& and ' are legal characters in URIs, not even URI Templates,
and are "problematic" for XML.
; is legal and sure to cause problems in SQL.
{ and } will cause issues with many templating engines.
This is why XML, SQL and templating engines have escaping rules.
-joe
--
Joe Gregorio http://bitworking.org
Received on Friday, 26 October 2007 15:06:01 UTC