- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 21:31:14 -0500
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 00:30, Chris Lilley wrote: > On Saturday, October 4, 2003, 12:40:01 AM, Dan wrote: > > > DC> This overstates the case: > > DC> "any such transcoding will make the self-description false and will > DC> cause the document to be not well-formed." > DC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-webarch-20031001/#no-text-xml > > DC> counterexample: > DC> <doc/> > DC> transcode from us-ascii to utf-8 or iso8859-1. > DC> The result is still well-formed. > > Until you do further processing, such as adding an attribute with an > e-acute. Though you still might get lucky - its the statistical > vagarity of the breakage that is the problem. Then very well, let the document say that. > And, clearly, transcoding <doc/> between UTF-8 and UTF-16 *will* cause > non well formedness in all cases. Or that. > Perhaps "any such transcoding will make the self description false and > cause the document to be not well formed <i>unless you get real > lucky</i>" That would correct the error as well. > DC> Overall, I think that section is awkward and doesn't > DC> make a very good case. > > I think that section is stellar and makes a crucially important point. I think there is an important point to be made; I don't think factual errors are a very good way to make any point, though. > An architecture that encourages non-well-formed XML on the server id > fragile, and I am strongly against any architecture that promotes it. > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 5 October 2003 22:31:26 UTC