- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 10:55:14 -0700
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > Unlike Rick I am not making this argument on the basis of the ease of > detecting encoding labelling or conversion errors; rather, on the > basis of those non-printing characters having no basis being in a > marked up document. I mean, start of string? end of guarded area? I profoundly agree with Chris here, but I had thought this issue to have been long-since decided. My vision of XML is that element content is text, and text is a string of characters, and characters have the semantics that Unicode says they have. Most of the C0 and C1 control characters have no useful or agreed-upon semantics, and they have no place in XML under any circumstances. Their inclusion substantially decreases interoperability. Do enough of the TAG agree that we should take this up officially? -Tim
Received on Friday, 11 April 2003 13:55:17 UTC