W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > July to September 2002

RE: [xml-dev] The version number in XML documents

From: Michael Kay <michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 17:32:10 +0100
To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, <xml-editor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002701c2300a$feebaee0$6401a8c0@pcukmka>

> The XML Core WG solicits public feedback on making an 
> erratum-level change to XML 1.0, requiring that if a version 
> number appears in the XML declaration, that it must be "1.0".

You mean you want to abuse the errata process to make a retrospective
change to the spec that is not actually an erratum.
> 
> Currently the version number can be almost any sequence of 
> letters, digits, and period, but XML processors are allowed 
> to throw a fatal error if the value is anything but "1.0".  
> With the proposed erratum, it will be a fatal error to use 
> anything but "1.0".
> 
> The intention of this proposal is to give XML 1.0 parsers a 
> way to reject XML 1.1 documents up front by reason of version 
> incompatibility.
> 
They are already allowed to reject a document claiming version="1.1", as
you have just said. They are also allowed to process it, and accept it
provided it conforms in all other respects to XML 1.0. Since (one hopes)
the vast majority of documents that are well-formed under XML 1.1 will
also be well-formed under XML 1.0, why are you trying to make a
retrospective change that forces XML 1.0 parsers to reject such
documents?

It means that instead of having two kinds of parser out there, those
that conform to XML 1.0 and those that conform to XML 1.1, we'll have
three sorts, those two plus parsers that conformed to XML 1.0 at the
time they were released but don't conform to XML 1.0 as retrospectively
amended. Is this really an improvement?

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@ntlworld.com
work: Michael.Kay@softwareag.com 
Received on Saturday, 20 July 2002 12:30:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:32 GMT