On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Andreas Magnusson wrote:
> Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > IN this case, we're just designing a new format that our software will not
> > have to read, so I don't see the compatibility problems. OTOH, I don't
> > think it is at all worth the trouble just to be able to display some
> > control characters in plaintext. We'll have to encode invalid UTF8 anyway.
> >
> The compatibility problem is everyone else. There are a lot of very
> knowledge-able people that view xml 1.1 as DOA (I haven't been able to
> find one person who think it's a good standard (apart from the W3C), go
> figure). Note that a 1.1 document isn't backward compatible *at all*, so
> I would recommend dropping even thinking about xml 1.1 as a viable
> alternative.
>
Heh, seems like good points. It wouldn't buy us much anyway.
Dropping...:-)
Regards,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 27 22:44:10 2005