there is no guarantee that the output remains wellformed when tickers are patched or newly created
F.U.D. Demonstrate how that's likely to break.
XML::Fling was designed to take the important (likely to break) aspects of well-formed XML into account. Sure, you can do really stupid things with it that would produce obviously broken XML because it doesn't waste time checking for obviously stupid things, but I don't see a problem there.
And you can stop suggesting alternate ways of handling control characters. I've been through a bunch but when XML 1.1 showed signs of sanity, the two choices of "strip 'em" and "leave 'em be" became the hands-down winners.
So you are restricted to the ways of using Genx that I've already stated: As an optional alternative or when it supports what we already do.
- tye
In reply to Re^9: XML::Fling begone? (goals)
by tye
in thread XML::Fling begone?
by Aristotle
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |