Xml 1.1

Controversial additions

[Hester]

The W3C have published the Recommendation spec for XML 1.1:

[w3.org ]

Care of Dive Into Mark [diveintomark.org], here's a list of the changes:

[cafeconleche.org ]

What's this? A break character? The other changes look typically controversial. The advice is "Don't use it"!

[choster]

That excerpt (from Effective XML by Elliotte Rusty Harold) has been floating around for a few months. You can find a more balanced article at [xml.com...] .

[bird]

I don't quite understand why "don't use improved tools" is supposed to be good advice. As far as I can tell, the primary complaint of Elliotte Rusty Harold simply goes: "Oh no! Now we need to update our tools!" And the suggestion to shove the writers of a few dozen not-so-common languages into an XML 1.1 ghetto seperate from the remaining IT world is extremely bad style on top of that.

XML 1.1, if applied correctly (which again applies to all technology), is designed to work in all situations where it is intended to work. This wasn't the case for XML 1.0. The old XML is simply an incomplete standard,which is a problem it partly inherited from the underlying Unicode 2. The new XML is a complete standard, and will work with Unicode 4 and beyond.