- From: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 14:45:50 -0800
- To: Tony Lavinio <alavinio@progress.com>
- CC: "public-xml-er@w3.org" <public-xml-er@w3.org>
I suggest this would be useful to solve consistent with solving JSON strings that also have the same problem in XML Sent from my iPhone On Feb 19, 2012, at 4:38 PM, "Tony Lavinio" <alavinio@progress.com> wrote: > We deal quite a bit with XML created by the equivalent of old-fashioned "print" statements. > > The two biggest problems we see come along are unescaped content -- primarily & vs. &, > and characters that are not expressible in XML -- primarily nulls, but often control characters. > > I can imagine several ways to deal with these. In the former case, turning a plain & into & > is easy, but not so easy when the content looks like &&. > > In the latter case, should nulls be dropped? Turned into <?unicode \u0000?>? Would we need > to define different /types/ of fixup modes, depending on how the user wants errors to be > handled? > > -- > TONY LAVINIO > PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION > 14 Oak Park | Bedford, MA 01730-1414 | USA > WWW.PROGRESS.COM >
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 12:56:09 UTC