W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Change proposal for issue 103, was: ISSUE-103 change proposal

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:14:09 +0000 (UTC)
To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1003230013520.4116@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, Philip Taylor wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:26:48 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> > wrote:
> > > Replace the last sentence by:
> > > 
> > > "Note: Due to restrictions of the XML syntax, in XML the U+003C LESS-THAN
> > > SIGN (<) needs be escaped as well."
> > 
> > That seems incomplete. The sequence ]]> comes to mind.
> 
> That's not an issue in attribute values, as far as I'm aware.
> 
> But in attribute values, U+000D and U+000A and U+0009 must be escaped too.
> (Depending on DTD you might also need to escape any leading or trailing U+0020
> and at least one of any adjacent pair of U+0020s, I think.)

This discussion is exactly the reason why including this in the spec is a 
bad idea.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2010 00:14:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:59 UTC