Re: XHTML/XML comment

However, my question is why XML
> (and thus XHTML) was created as case-sensitive in the first place
> (especially if neither SGML or HTML share this characteristic

Two reasons that I know of, there may be more.

1.XML supports UNICODE . Most of the worlds character sets are not case
sensitive. If XML supported two cases, the character mappings would have
become quite complex.

One of the requirements for XML is that tools for XML should be easy to
author. Allowing only one case makes the job of building a parser much
easier.

Frank
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Luebcke <CLuebcke@Heur.com>
To: 'Frank Boumphrey' <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: XHTML/XML comment


> > From: Frank Boumphrey [mailto:bckman@ix.netcom.com]
> > > I'm sure I'm just lacking background on this, but could
> > > somebody summarize what the reason behind this minor
> > > hindrance is? Thanks
> >
> > XML unlike SGML is case sensitive. XML parsers will throw an
> > error if the
> > case is wrong. The working group had to decide for one way or
> > the other, the
> > four type considered were UPPERCASE, camelBack, FirstCaps,
> > and lowercase.
> >
> > For better or worse we voted on lowercase. This was made
> > clear in the early
> > public drafts about a year ago! It's too late to change it now!!
> > Frank
>
> Doubtless it's too late to change it now. However, my question is why XML
> (and thus XHTML) was created as case-sensitive in the first place
> (especially if neither SGML or HTML share this characteristic). I am
> grateful, though, that you settled on lowercase when you had to pick.
> Chris

Received on Monday, 31 January 2000 13:07:58 UTC