In message <[log in to unmask]>, "Terry Allen" writes:
>Dave Morris writes:
>| On the other hand, references to undeclared entities
>| + and numeric character references which cannot be resolved
>| + (e.g., are out of range)
>| should be treated as data characters.
>And are not what we want to say here.
> The language about
>numeric charrefs has been carefully crafted. It will be
>revised in the next version of HTML that appears after an
>internationalization proposal is agreed upon (Gavin, time to
>get a move on).
> At that point we can discuss what "out of
>range" might mean.
"out of range" means >255, or whatever the SGML declaration in
effect says is out of range. It seems perfectly well-defined to
> I strongly urge we stay with the
>present language here, much as I feel your pain.
Personally, I don't give a flying flip one way or the other. I'm
pretty tired of specifying what HTML user agents should do when the
modem introduces line noise into the document, your baby brother pukes
on it, and the stars align to signal the end of the world. An error
is an error. Deal with it.
But one more "should" in there in the interest of consistent error
handling at this point won't hurt anything.