Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit:

>  Unicode character normalization should be performed on XML documents,
>  unless you don't feel like it, in which case you can ignore it. This almost
>  makes sense. Basically it says that parsers may change an e followed by a
>  combining accent acute into the single character é if they want to or the
>  client asks for it. The details are quite complicated, but at least it's
>  optional.

No, not at all!  XML 1.1 says that parsers should *check* normalization,
not that they should *perform* it.  So a parser that sees an e followed
by a combining acute should report the lack of normalization to the
calling application.

This is a most important distinction.  XML *generators* should generate
normalized output; XML *accepters* should check normalization.

>  And of course all the other problems previous drafts have had are 
>  still present. I've already calumnied these sufficiently in the past. 

Oh, go ahead and slug us again -- we can take it.

-- 
My corporate data's a mess!			John Cowan
It's all semi-structured, no less.		http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    But I'll be carefree			jcowan@[...].com
    Using XSLT					http://www.reutershealth.com
In an XML DBMS.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>