Peter Pöml wrote: > a discussion how whitespace should be treated came up on the apps- > discuss list [*]. > > Short summary: > > Whitespace matters in all of Metalink's XML elements, and MUST not be > ignored; it's part of their content. This also implies a caveat for > generators to make sure that some XML library that's used doesn't add > whitespace around values by default. (The exmples in the Internet > Draft need to be fixed to match this. This affects date fields and > IRIs (URLs).) > However, a more relaxed scheme that would strip trailing and leading > whitespace has been suggested: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01189.html > > I'm pondering on this, and would love to hear some opinions...
My suggestion: * whitespace inside an element that has to have text (for example <url>) is significant. The whitespace would be considered part of the URL. * whitespace *between* that kind of elements (like after a </url> and before the next <url>, or before </resources>) is not significant. -- Nicolas I read mailing lists through Gmane. Please don't Cc me on replies; it makes me get one message on my newsreader and another on email. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en.
