Hi Matthias! Matthias Wimmer wrote: >>> I it really necessary, that RFC 3920bis mandates a server to reject such >>> XMPP streams? I very much dislike this requirement, as it would require >>> me to implement my own XML parser, as I don't know any parser I could >>> use, that could be configured to notice me that these characters have >>> been received unescaped. >> If we change the text regarding restricted XML features (i.e., say that >> the characters that don't need to be escaped in XML don't need to be >> escaped in XMPP), would you still object to the error handling? > > Yes. In that case we would be able to use most (push) SAX parsers.
Yes, you would still object? Or yes, you think that's fine? Please choose one (phrased better this time): If we specify that you must escape only the characters that the XML specification says you must escape, then: (1) I think the stream error handling now in rfc3920bis is OK. (2) I think the stream error handling now in rfc3920bis is evil. > (Well one question left: Is RFC3920bis forbidding numeric character > references? No! > AFAIK numeric character references are NO entities and are > therfore not forbidden, but if they would be, I'd have a problem > generating the <restricted-xml/> error in all cases as well.) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
