XML 1.1 vs XML 1.0
| Project: | EPUB Maintenance |
| Component: | General |
| Category: | task |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | TKanai |
| Status: | completed @ 2.0.1 |
Jump to:
Both OPF and OCF (container.xml) file format calls for XML 1.1. And also it says "Reading Systems must be XML processors as defined in XML 1.1." This means Reading systems must support both XML 1.1 and XML 1.0. Technically speaking, XML 1.1 is not just a latest version of XML. Xml 1.1 processors must support XML Namespace 1.1, for example. And XML Namespace 1.1 is not applicable to XML 1.0. An then, XML 1.1 specification sentenced "Programs which generate XML SHOULD generate XML 1.0, unless one of the specific features of XML 1.1 is required." in 5.1 Do we really need XML 1.1 features for discribing both OPF and META-INF/container.xml? When I tried XML 1.1 opf file on ADE, the processor did not work as XML 1.1 processor. (I just put #x2028 into field as an end-of-line, but it was handled as a character.I've not tested about Namespace 1.1.) This means Adobe Digital Edition is not an EPUB compliant Reading System. And now XML 1.1 is not the latest version of the xml specification. XML 1.0 fifth edition is the latest and released in 2008. (XML 1.1 is 2006.) Then, we should use XML 1.0 as a base format and require Reading Systems as XML 1.0 processors.
The following language will be included in 2.0.1. Along with the addition of a statement along the lines of "Reading Systems MAY support XML 1.1, but this feature is deprecated in version 2.0.1 (in favor of XML 1.0). Support for XML 1.1 will be removed in the next version of the specification."
OPF Specification::
In 1.2:Definitions XML DOCUMENT, replace
An XML Document is a complete and valid XML document as defined in XML 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/).
with
An XML Document is a complete and valid XML document as defined in XML 1.0 (Fourth Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/).
In 1.2:Definitions XML NAMESPACES, replace
Referred to as XML namespaces, or just namespaces, these must conform to XML Namespaces (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/).
with
Referred to as XML namespaces, or just namespaces, these must conform to XML Namespaces (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/).
In 1.3:Relationship to Other Specifications, replace
1.Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1 (SecondEdition) specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/); and
2.Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/);
with
1.Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition) specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/); and
2.Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/);
In 1.3.1:Relationship to XML, replace
Reading Systems must be XML processors as defined in XML 1.1
with
Reading Systems must be XML processors as defined in XML 1.0
In 1.4.1.1:Package Conformance, replae
i.it is a well-formed XML document (as defined in XML 1.1);
with
i.it is a well-formed XML document (as defined in XML 1.0);
In 1.4.3:Compatibility of OPF Version 2.0, replace
XML 1.1 is incorporated.
with
XML 1.0 is incorporated.
OCF Specification::
In 1.3 Relationship to Other Specifications, replace
1. The XML 1.1 Extensible Markup Language specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/);
with
1. The XML 1.0 Extensible Markup Language specification (Fourth Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/);
and
The XML 1.1 namespace specification ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/);
with
The XML 1.0 namespace specification (Second Edition)( http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/);
In 1.4.1 Conforming Containers, replace
(as defined in XML 1.1)
with
(as defined in XML 1.0)
and
All XML files MUST be compatible with the XML 1.1 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml11-20040204) and the Namespaces in XML specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names)
with
All XML files MUST be compatible with the XML 1.0 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/) and the Namespaces in XML specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/).
- Login to post comments
Comments
#1
#2
I agree with this proposal. Pretty hard to find links to qualify this statement, but XML 1.1 is generally considered a dead end failure, and with XML 1.0 5th ed the W3C is basically doing a second try to move in the same direction.
A related issue here is whether the EPUB specs should reference a dated version of the XML spec (which would lock to a specific edition of XML 1.0) or an undated (which would automatically refer to the latest edition). At this time for example, XML1.0 5th is unusable pending an update to the XML Namespaces recommendation [1], so at this time XML 1.0 4ed is a "safe" reference, whereas 5th ed is not (yet).
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2008OctDec/0016.html
#3
I agree that the 4th is "safe" in every respects.
Any objections?
If not, I would like to revice the two specs.
#4
Proposal:
Both OPF and OCF refer to
XML 1.0 (Fourth Edition) http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/
Namespace in XML 1.0 (Second Edition) http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/
#5
XML 1.1 is dead, and parsers for it are few and far between. Having to support XML 1.1 makes creating tools for epub creation much harder than it needs to be.
#6
OPF Specification::
In 1.2:Definitions XML DOCUMENT, replace
An XML Document is a complete and valid XML document as defined in XML 1.1 (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/).
with
An XML Document is a complete and valid XML document as defined in XML 1.0 (Fourth Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/).
In 1.2:Definitions XML NAMESPACES, replace
Referred to as XML namespaces, or just namespaces, these must conform to XML Namespaces (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/).
with
Referred to as XML namespaces, or just namespaces, these must conform to XML Namespaces (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/).
In 1.3:Relationship to Other Specifications, replace
1.Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1 (SecondEdition) specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/); and
2.Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/);
with
1.Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition) specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/); and
2.Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/);
In 1.3.1:Relationship to XML, replace
Reading Systems must be XML processors as defined in XML 1.1
with
Reading Systems must be XML processors as defined in XML 1.0
In 1.4.1.1:Package Conformance, replae
i.it is a well-formed XML document (as defined in XML 1.1);
with
i.it is a well-formed XML document (as defined in XML 1.0);
In 1.4.3:Compatibility of OPF Version 2.0, replace
XML 1.1 is incorporated.
with
XML 1.0 is incorporated.
OCF Specification::
In 1.3 Relationship to Other Specifications, replace
1. The XML 1.1 Extensible Markup Language specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/);
with
1. The XML 1.0 Extensible Markup Language specification (Fourth Edition) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/);
and
The XML 1.1 namespace specification ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/);
with
The XML 1.0 namespace specification (Second Edition)( http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/);
In 1.4.1 Conforming Containers, replace
(as defined in XML 1.1)
with
(as defined in XML 1.0)
and
All XML files MUST be compatible with the XML 1.1 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml11-20040204) and the Namespaces in XML specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names)
with
All XML files MUST be compatible with the XML 1.0 specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/) and the Namespaces in XML specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816/).
#7
Moved to "errata" including slight addition to the previously proposed resolution (now in the resolution field).
#8