vertical tab in XML

Discussion in 'XML' started by Andy Fish, Nov 6, 2007.

  1. Andy Fish

    Andy Fish Guest

    hello,

    I have an xml document that contains an element like this:

    <foo title="hello, world "/>

    I can edit the file with visual studio or XML spy without any warnings.
    however, if I try to process it using .Net 2.0 XslCompiledTransform, I get
    the error:

    System.ArgumentException: ' ', hexadecimal value 0x0B, is an invalid
    character.

    running the same transformation in .Net 1.1 or XMLSpy's built-in XSLT
    processor does not give an error.

    I have seen in the XML specification that character code 0B (vt) is not a
    valid XML character but I'm not quite clear on whether this means that a
    character reference to vt is also invalid.

    either way surely something is wrong? - I created the file in .Net 2.0 using
    XmlDocument.Save() but I can't process it in .net 2.0. this is exactly the
    sort of problem I thought using standard XML libraries was supposed to
    protect me from.

    Andy
     
    Andy Fish, Nov 6, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Andy Fish <> wrote in
    <Jz%Xi.93842$>:
    > I have an xml document that contains an element like this:
    >
    > <foo title="hello, world "/>


    No you don't:

    pavel@debian:~/dev/xml$ xmllint vtab.xml
    vtab.xml:1: parser error : xmlParseCharRef: invalid xmlChar
    value 11
    <foo title="hello, world "/>
    ^
    pavel@debian:~/dev/xml$

    > I can edit the file with visual studio or XML spy without
    > any warnings. however, if I try to process it using .Net
    > 2.0 XslCompiledTransform, I get the error:
    >
    > System.ArgumentException: ' ', hexadecimal value 0x0B, is
    > an invalid character.


    Right on money.

    > running the same transformation in .Net 1.1 or XMLSpy's
    > built-in XSLT processor does not give an error.


    Those are broken then. Complain about broken tools to the
    tools' vendors (well, Microsoft seems to have fixed it, -
    and good luck trying to get Altova to comply).

    > I have seen in the XML specification that character code
    > 0B (vt) is not a valid XML character but I'm not quite
    > clear on whether this means that a character reference to
    > vt is also invalid.


    It does.

    2.2 Characters

    [Definition: A parsed entity contains text, a sequence of
    characters, which may represent markup or character data.]
    [Definition: A character is an atomic unit of text as
    specified by ISO/IEC 10646:2000 [ISO/IEC 10646]. Legal
    characters are tab, carriage return, line feed, and the
    legal characters of Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646. The
    versions of these standards cited in A.1 Normative
    References were current at the time this document was
    prepared. New characters may be added to these standards
    by amendments or new editions. Consequently, XML
    processors MUST accept any character in the range
    specified for Char. ]

    As I read it, it doesn't speak about the default
    serialisation, but about the very XML infoset.

    > either way surely something is wrong? - I created the file
    > in .Net 2.0 using XmlDocument.Save() but I can't process
    > it in .net 2.0.


    Still broken then.

    > this is exactly the sort of problem I thought using
    > standard XML libraries was supposed to protect me from.


    It is. So complain to the people who wrote those tools.

    --
    "I can't help but wonder if you... don't know a hell of a
    lot more about practically every subject than Solomon ever
    did."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 6, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. [I'm not honouring the Followup-To: line since we don't have that
    newsgroup here, and anyway this is relevant in comp.text.xml.]

    In article <fgq324$mrb$>, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:

    >> I have an xml document that contains an element like this:


    >> <foo title="hello, world "/>


    >No you don't:


    Here is an XML document containing that element:

    <?xml version="1.1"?>
    <foo title="hello, world "/>

    Whether your tools support XML 1.1 is another matter.

    -- Richard
    --
    "Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
    in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
     
    Richard Tobin, Nov 6, 2007
    #3
  4. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    It seems I just won the Paper Bag for the sloppiest post of
    Nov 2007. Oh well. It is an honour.

    Richard Tobin <> wrote in
    <fgqhg3$2pvt$>:
    > [I'm not honouring the Followup-To: line since we don't
    > [have that newsgroup here, and anyway this is relevant in
    > comp.text.xml.]


    Oops, my fault entirely. I haven't noticed that the original
    message was crossposted, and my newsreader is configured to
    automatically set follow-ups to just one group if that is
    the case.

    > In article <fgq324$mrb$>, Pavel Lepin
    > <> wrote:
    >>> I have an xml document that contains an element like
    >>> this:

    >
    >>> <foo title="hello, world "/>

    >
    >>No you don't:

    >
    > Here is an XML document containing that element:
    >
    > <?xml version="1.1"?>
    > <foo title="hello, world "/>
    >
    > Whether your tools support XML 1.1 is another matter.


    Oops, my fault again - on two counts. I ignored the fact
    that this was just a part of the document and decided that
    the lack of the declaration implied the OP was dealing with
    XML 1.0.

    Apart from that, I looked at 2.2 in XML 1.1 SE just out of
    sporting interest and staggered away fifteen minutes later,
    utterly confused but under the impression that the
    characters in RestrictedChar production were still
    disallowed: it's mentioned only a couple more times in the
    spec, defining those characters as disallowed in documents
    and external parsed entities.

    Seemingly my caffeine intake was below normal yesterday.

    Today, knowing the correct answer, I realised that
    RestrictedChars were allowed as character references, due
    to changes in Char production, and following from verbiage
    in 4.1 (and it's explicitly stated in layman's terms in 1.3
    to boot... well, duh).

    Those damned lawyers.

    I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering? I
    seem to be doing a lot of that recently, and fail miserably
    more often than not.

    --
    "I can't help but wonder if you... don't know a hell of a
    lot more about practically every subject than Solomon ever
    did."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 7, 2007
    #4
  5. Pavel Lepin wrote:
    > I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering?


    The best way to learn that skill, as far as I know, is to actually be
    involved in writing a specification of this sort. Writing a few patents
    also helps, but it's a slightly different set of issues.

    The W3C specs in particular have two problems. One is that there's a
    "cultural" mandate that they be "prescriptive rather than descriptive"
    -- it's asserted that these specs are written for an expert reader, and
    that anyone who isn't an expert in this specific area will be reading
    tutorials and articles rather than the spec itself. The other is that
    while companies are willing to donate techical skills to the W3C (to
    make sure the spec says the right things), they are unfortunately much
    less willing to donate techical-writing skills (to make sure the spec is
    actually readable). The W3C does have a few real technical writers, but
    they're overloaded and usually can't get involved until very late in the
    process, which limits how much they can help.

    --
    Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden
     
    Joseph Kesselman, Nov 7, 2007
    #5
  6. Andy Fish

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 7 Nov, 18:09, Joseph Kesselman <> wrote:
    > Pavel Lepin wrote:
    > > I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering?

    >
    > The best way to learn that skill, as far as I know, is to actually be
    > involved in writing a specification of this sort. Writing a few patents
    > also helps, but it's a slightly different set of issues.


    My last patent (a useful one) was so mangled by the corpo-prat lawyers
    writing it that I no longer recognised it. The one before that managed
    to shift its claims enough that it started to overlap with something
    Google had obviously been doing publically for years.

    I have great respect for people writing specs (I've never personally
    been on a W3 WG, but I've lived in the next cube and sat in a bit on
    their meetings). Patent lawyers though!
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 7, 2007
    #6
  7. Andy Fish

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 7 Nov, 07:27, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:
    > I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering?


    Asperger's is a natural talent, not something that can be taught.
    :cool:
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 7, 2007
    #7
  8. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Joseph Kesselman <> wrote in
    <4731ff62$1@kcnews01>:
    > Pavel Lepin wrote:
    >> I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering?

    >
    > The best way to learn that skill, as far as I know, is to
    > actually be involved in writing a specification of this
    > sort.


    Tempting, tempting. But four thousand euro is a good bit
    more that I can cough up at the moment.

    ObXML: I can just see myself in HTML WG meetings, though:

    "...also, I submit that we all must honourably commit
    seppuku right now rather than serve the Dark Side by
    producing the HTML 5 spec."

    > Writing a few patents also helps, but it's a slightly
    > different set of issues.


    Unless I'm much mistaken, we don't have software patents on
    this side of the pond. Thank god for that, too.

    --
    "DAD! DID YOU KNOW THERE WERE RATS UP HERE?"
    "'s a'ight, Mortin dun' bite."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 8, 2007
    #8
  9. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Andy Dingley <> wrote in
    <>:
    > On 7 Nov, 07:27, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:
    >> I wonder if there are any courses in language lawyering?

    >
    > Asperger's is a natural talent, not something that can be
    > taught. :cool:


    Wait a minute! I have that one!

    --
    "DAD! DID YOU KNOW THERE WERE RATS UP HERE?"
    "'s a'ight, Mortin dun' bite."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 8, 2007
    #9
  10. In article <fgudil$iav$>, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:

    >> The best way to learn that skill, as far as I know, is to
    >> actually be involved in writing a specification of this
    >> sort.


    >Tempting, tempting. But four thousand euro is a good bit
    >more that I can cough up at the moment.


    It is possible to participate in W3C Working Groups as an invited
    expert, though I don't know the details of the procedure.

    -- Richard
    --
    "Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
    in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
     
    Richard Tobin, Nov 8, 2007
    #10
  11. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    [OT?] Participation in W3C WGs Re: vertical tab in XML

    Richard Tobin <> wrote in
    <fguik1$1168$>:
    > In article <fgudil$iav$>, Pavel Lepin
    > <> wrote:
    >>> The best way to learn that skill, as far as I know, is
    >>> to actually be involved in writing a specification of
    >>> this sort.

    >
    >>Tempting, tempting. But four thousand euro is a good bit
    >>more that I can cough up at the moment.

    >
    > It is possible to participate in W3C Working Groups as an
    > invited expert, though I don't know the details of the
    > procedure.


    Yes, but I don't qualify. If I paid four thousand for the
    honour, messing the specs up would be perfectly fine with
    me. Being invited as an expert, when I'm hardly anything of
    the sort, and then leaving my, er, unmistakable imprint on
    the recommendations the world is going to use for years to
    come - that wouldn't be, well, my kind of thing.

    --
    "DAD! DID YOU KNOW THERE WERE RATS UP HERE?"
    "'s a'ight, Mortin dun' bite."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 8, 2007
    #11
  12. Andy Fish

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 8 Nov, 08:50, (Richard Tobin) wrote:

    > It is possible to participate in W3C Working Groups as an invited
    > expert, though I don't know the details of the procedure.


    Get a job at a big fluffy corporate with a relaxed work ethic. You get
    on the WG and they give _you_ the thousands of euro :cool:
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 8, 2007
    #12
  13. Andy Fish

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 8 Nov, 07:23, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:

    > ObXML: I can just see myself in HTML WG meetings, though:
    >
    > "...also, I submit that we all must honourably commit
    > seppuku right now rather than serve the Dark Side by
    > producing the HTML 5 spec."


    That's just gone up on our corporate wiki, under HTML 5 :cool:
     
    Andy Dingley, Nov 8, 2007
    #13
  14. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Andy Dingley <> wrote in
    <>:
    > On 8 Nov, 07:23, Pavel Lepin <> wrote:
    >> ObXML: I can just see myself in HTML WG meetings, though:
    >>
    >> "...also, I submit that we all must honourably commit
    >> seppuku right now rather than serve the Dark Side by
    >> producing the HTML 5 spec."

    >
    > That's just gone up on our corporate wiki, under HTML 5
    > :cool:


    It's really a "ha ha only serious" thing. I suppose it would
    make a good .sig, too.

    --
    "DAD! DID YOU KNOW THERE WERE RATS UP HERE?"
    "'s a'ight, Mortin dun' bite."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 8, 2007
    #14
  15. Richard Tobin wrote:
    > It is possible to participate in W3C Working Groups as an invited
    > expert, though I don't know the details of the procedure.


    It's also possible to participate by getting involved in the Interest
    Group associated with one of the working groups. Some WGs treat the IG
    as auxilliary WG members; some don't. If you make yourself valuable
    enough as an IG member, you *may* get an invitation to become more
    official. That's essentially how I got roped in, though in my case I
    wound up taking over one of my company's delegate slots.

    I don't remember whether IG involvement is limited to official W3C
    members or not.


    --
    Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden
     
    Joseph Kesselman, Nov 8, 2007
    #15
  16. Andy Fish

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Joseph Kesselman <> wrote in
    <473341ff$1@kcnews01>:
    > Richard Tobin wrote:
    >> It is possible to participate in W3C Working Groups as an
    >> invited expert, though I don't know the details of the
    >> procedure.

    >
    > It's also possible to participate by getting involved in
    > the Interest Group associated with one of the working
    > groups.


    [...]

    > I don't remember whether IG involvement is limited to
    > official W3C members or not.


    Depends on the group in question:

    http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/groups.html#ig-mail-only

    Some allow public participation, some don't, whatever they
    decide to write in the group's charter.

    --
    "DAD! DID YOU KNOW THERE WERE RATS UP HERE?"
    "'s a'ight, Mortin dun' bite."
     
    Pavel Lepin, Nov 9, 2007
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Hermit Dave
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    478
    Hermit Dave
    Jan 22, 2004
  2. Greenhorn

    formfeed \f, vertical tab \v usage

    Greenhorn, Mar 5, 2005, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,642
    Villy Kruse
    Mar 7, 2005
  3. Bill Nicholson
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,539
    Eliyahu Goldin
    Aug 2, 2007
  4. Spiros Bousbouras

    What good are vertical tab and form feed for ?

    Spiros Bousbouras, Aug 20, 2007, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,018
    Barry Schwarz
    Aug 24, 2007
  5. Steve
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    133
    Steve
    Jun 4, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page