Note that the passage you quoted does not appear anywhere in the spec.

XML has aspects of a binary format. Specifically, the encoding can't be changed. That's why it must be passed to a parser undecoded and why it has the MIME type of a binary format (application/).

It also has aspects of a text format. Specifically, the ability to be read and edited by humans with nothing but basic tools.

Considering neither "text format" nor "binary format" are actually defined, it's silly to debate without first putting out definitions.

Note that the passage you quoted does not appear anywhere in the spec.

Que? If you follow the link behind the quoted passage, the very first line of the very first paragraph is word for word what I quoted.

it's silly to debate

Then let's not huh.

This pointless discussion has gone far enough already due to a rabid dog with a bruised ego. There's no point in your adding to the fray further is there.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

The start of some sanity?

Que? If you follow the link behind the quoted passage, the very first line of the very first paragraph is word for word what I quoted.

I said "the passage you quoted does not appear anywhere in the spec", emphasis added.

And by "the passage", I really meant any reference to being a text format at all.

Yes.

Well, that is simply incorrect. It's not incorrect to say it is a text format, of course. It's just incorrect to say that it isn't binary. Textual data is binary even if not all binary data is textual. I imagine you know this, but on computers,† even text is represented with two values.‡

The only time drawing a distinction between text and binary data actually matters is when when working on a platform that was designed with the questionable choice to arbitrarily support two different sets of semantics.

What you should learn from all the "unicrap" stuff is that text was just never a very meaningful term to begin with. It's only precise use is as an instruction to handle the data in a platform specific manner.

Furthermore, on those platforms where it is meaningful, it's a relic from an era when the only data presented for human consumption was textual. Nowadays, that's just not the case; and the appropriate question is simply: "what format?" Is it an old word document? A spreadsheet? ASCII? ASCII with CRLF line endings? UTF-8? JPG data? Etc.

† Almost all computers in use today, that is.

‡ Hence, even the term 'binary data' is generally redundant.

Blah ...

Now who's "getting all epistemological".

What you should learn ...

What you need to learn is that your platform-bias bullshit is naught but the meaningless dogma of last resort.

If there were no platform differences, the subject of this entire thread wouldn't exist, but it does. And you can neither wish it away nor bullshit your way around it.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

The start of some sanity?

What you need to learn is that your platform-bias bullshit is naught but the meaningless dogma of last resort.

What platform bias?

My bias is against poor design choices. And pretty much every platform has some design choices that I think are, at best, questionable.

The design choice we are talking about will likely disappear in time. That's something to look forward to.

This sub-thread was in response to your histrionics about RFCs getting "messy" with "unicrap". Your emotional language notwithstanding, I'm pretty sure the RFCs will remain the antithesis of "messy." Plenty of them, over the last 15+ years, have already been written with Unicode in mind. There's really no need for the gnashing of teeth and ringing of hands.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";