- From: Bill Smith <bill.smith@Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 09:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Arjun Ray wrote: > Unless the XML spec will have normative statements regarding error recovery, > anything better than a coredump is graceful enough, IMHO. I'd like to repeat > my earlier comments: > > - A popular language *will* have untutored/unsophisticated users. > > - It will take just one implementation modeled on Mosaic 2.4 to > make tag salad an ugly reality, *especially* if "graceful > recovery" becomes an *expected* feature. Let application developers decide how to handle error recovery. Some will opt for graceful recovery, whether as a result of "untutored/unsophisticated users" or some other "failure" like transmission errors. Others will opt for a coredump - like some 30% of Unix utilities. I don't think we should specify the expected behavior. We should take into consideration whether robust applications can be developed around XML and part of that is graceful error recovery. My point on </TAG> is that it enables an application to recover from what is likely to frequently occur in the input stream.
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 1996 12:25:52 UTC