- From: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 06:00:23 -0700
- To: "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- CC: "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
I agree with Liam. NO > in attribute values. period. Why ? Because I believe that if microXML documents *as is* are not parsable by existing XML processors then we have invented a totally new language and any attempt to be close-to-xml is pointless besides the familiarity aspect and we should just start over. I believe it would be a huge mistake to require microxml processors just to parse microxml. We then have the chicken & egg problem of *having* to make new toolsets just to get started. If MicroXML is parseable (even if not identically in data model) then we can start using it right now with XML parsers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Lee Lead Engineer MarkLogic Corporation dlee@marklogic.com Phone: +1 812-482-5224 Cell: +1 812-630-7622 www.marklogic.com -----Original Message----- From: Liam R E Quin [mailto:liam@w3.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 12:13 AM To: John Cowan Cc: public-microxml@w3.org Subject: 9. Are > characters allowed in attribute values? On Mon, 2012-09-03 at 21:33 -0400, John Cowan wrote: > 9. Are > characters allowed in attribute values? There has been no > discussion, but nobody has asked for them. No. Are they allowed in comments, if comments are allowed? Yes. Is -- allowed in comments? This was why I proposed <!--* .... this is a comment... *--> for XML. The general issue is about "things allowed inside things and how to escape them". -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1118162137/liamquinxml The barefoot troublemaker
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 13:00:57 UTC