Microsoft's responce to XML.com article
david-b at pacbell.net
Sat Jan 15 18:22:15 GMT 2000
James Clark wrote:
> David Brownell wrote:
> > "Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> > * Is <![CDATA[ ]> the same as ignorable whitespace? We say no.
> > In this area, as in some others, the XML specification errata need to
> > get updated. This is test that I called attention to in the review.
> > (It came from some XML-Dev discussions, where Microsoft was silent.)
> > In the absence of W3C errata ruling out this handling, ...
> Microsoft is right on this one. See
Hmm, errata updated (previous 2/17/1999) ... YESTERDAY!!
Good news that they got updated, though from the evidence
the corrections have been sitting on the shelf for about
seven months now. Prompt publication would have helped
everyone; for example, the first published version of those
tests would likely have addressed then-current errata.
> I have to say I think it's inappropriate for the NIST/OASIS test suite
> to include controversial cases, where there are legitimate differences
> of opinion on the correct interpretation of the spec that are not
> resolved by the errata.
As I recall, when this case was incorporated there was no
known controversy. There had been a discussion, and it had
seemed to be settled -- which is how that case got in. Any
controversy came by later.
At any rate, that issue can now be fully laid to rest, since
more of the errata are now published. And I will hope that
the test suite gets promptly updated.
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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
More information about the Xml-dev