CDATA by any other name... (was The raw and the cooked)

[Paul Prescod]

John Cowan wrote:
> 
> Because I thought XML (and Unicode) were in the business of enabling,
> not constraining.  

XML DTDs are in the business of constraining people to the data models and
data that the software is expecting/can deal with. I don't see any big
difference between saying: "This content must be restricted to this set of
characters" and "this content must be a NMTOKEN or base-64 encoded."

Nevertheless, this is clearly a schema problem and CDATA sections seem to
me to be a really bad tool for enforcing this distinction. No editor
vendor is going to support that use for them so it is a moot point.

 Paul Prescod  - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights will be 50 years old on
December 10, 1998. These are your fundamental rights:
http://www.udhr.org/history/default.htm

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)