First draft of proposed XML TC for Unicode 3.0 (unofficial)

Rick Jelliffe ricko at
Sat Sep 11 08:46:57 BST 1999

From: Nik O <niko at>

>I argue that keeping simple "legal name character" rules is more
>than the rather slight possibility of breaking some existing XML
>At the risk of being labeled Anglo-centric, how many docs are likely to
>used these Greek, Arabic, Thai, Lao, or Tibetan symbols in XML names?

IMHO it should only be a wf-requirement to check for name characters
only with a granularity of  the low half-blocks: an application should
only need to look at 512 notional bits to test well-formedness of names,
apart from the first half block (i.e., the ASCII repertoire).   XML will
track Unicode, so the fine-grained approach of allocating name roles
character-by-character to every Unicode codepoint is overkill for
well-formedness and perhaps even for validity.

The full rules can be kept for full validity or as guidelines for
generating data. They are not bad, they are just more than is needed.

Rick Jelliffe

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list