You've mentioned this a few times, but I wonder if we are really making
a spec. for people who are not familiar with XML itself. Ignorable
whitespace is an unfortunate fact of life (and entities are a fortunate
fact of life) and people who want to work with XML parsers should be
familiar with XML concepts. All we should hide from them is the nitty
gritty syntax.
> Tim Bray's recent comments on this list imply that a validating parser
> using SAX could report ignorable whitespace as regular character data
> and still be conforming; if I have inferred correctly, then I am
> willing to omit this callback.
Could someone please show me where the spec. provides leeway for this
sort of thing? If SAX is meant to be usable with validating parsers
(e.g. parsers which report validation errors), then I feel that it
should support ignorable whitespace. On the other hand, if it is only
interested in the well-formedness level, then of course this is
irrelevant.
Paul Prescod
-- http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~paprescoArt is always at peril in universities, where there are so many people, young and old, who love art less than argument, and dote upon a text that provides the nutritious pemmican on which scholars love to chew. -- Robertson Davies in "The Cunning Man"
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)