Re: back to XML: The "You Babe" problem

• From: Christopher R. Maden <crm@ebt.com>
• Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 21:23:56 GMT
• To: w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org
• Message-Id: <199701142123.VAA08199@phaser.EBT.COM>

[Tim Bray]

> The XML spec as written would allow all of the following:
> 
>  &u-babe; &U-babe;  &u-BABE; &u-bABe

This was the reason for suggesting that function characters be used
instead.

a) Function characters are case-insensitive, unlike entities.
b) These are really character references, and &#u-babe; looks more
   like a character reference than &u-babe;, so is easier for users.
c) Since the syntax is fixed, using up the function character
   namespace is not a problem at all, unlike using up the entity
   namespace.

-Chris
-- 
Christopher R. Maden                      One Richmond Square
DynaText SIT Technical Support            Providence, RI 02906 USA
Inso Corporation                          +1.401.421.9550 (voice)
Electronic Publishing Solutions Division  +1.401.521.2030 (facsimile)

Received on Tuesday, 14 January 1997 16:36:28 UTC