W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > October 1996

Re: B.11 Empty end-tags?

From: Bill Smith <bill.smith@Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 09:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <libSDtMail.9610150925.15505.bsmith@providence>
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 

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:04 UTC