[rfc-i] CDATA, was: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-hoffman-xml2rfc-06.txt
tony at att.com
Tue Apr 29 08:44:29 PDT 2014
On 4/29/14, 4:11 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2014-04-28 21:34, Tony Hansen wrote:
>> On 4/28/14, 2:16 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>> Greetings again. As always, thanks for the input on the v3 draft. The
>>> changes include:
>>> - Pointing out that artwork that contains the string "]]>" also needs
>>> to be protected in a CDATA structure
>> Good start on this. Unfortunately, it's a bit more tricky than you
>> The string "]]>" is problematic both in and out of a CDATA structure.
>> The string is not allowed in XML and is a terminator for CDATA, so it
>> cannot exist either place.
> That is true, but I don't think it's really relevant here.
> People who use CDATA frequently think "anything can go in here", and
> it's good to warn that this is not the case.
This is the issue I'm trying to address. The text in the document states
that a ]]> needs to be put into a CDATA block in order to be expressed.
This is false.
Here are suggested wording changes:
Section 2.5 <artwork>:
If the artwork includes either "&" or "<" characters, or the string
"]]>" those characters need to be encoded using escaping or CDATA block(s).
See <sourcecode> (Section 2.49) for a fuller description of these solutions.
I also added a target to the <sourcecode> reference.
Section 2.49 <sourcecode>:
A common problem authors have with <sourcecode> is that the XML
processor returns errors if the text in the artwork contains either
the "&" or "<" character, or the string "]]>". To avoid these
problems, the "&" and "<" characters may be escaped using the strings
"&" and "<", respectively. Alternatively, they may be
surrounded in a CDATA structure: "<![CDATA]>". For example:
<![CDATA[allowed-chars = "." | "," | "&" | "<" | ">" | "|"]]>
The string "]]>" MUST be escaped, as in "]]>", or expressed in
multiple CDATA structures.
<![CDATA[Dealing with "]]]><![CDATA[&" is tricky.]]>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest