I have an online shop where vendors can upload and import there articles in two formats.
Currently I'm using XML 1.0.
However I see there is also a version 1.1
At wikipedia it is stated that for most uses 1.0 will be OK to use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML#Versions
It also states it uses the following Unicode encoding: Unicode 2.0 to Unicode 3.2.
In the fifth edition, XML names may contain characters in the Balinese, Cham, or Phoenician scripts among many others which have been added to Unicode since Unicode 3.2
Currently I only have a couple of 'latin' based languages but this may change in the future and I want to be prepared.
Are there any characters in Unicode 3.2 not supported for some languages? Is v1.0 safe to use for me?
If you need more info just let me know.
Note that in an XML Declaration the encoding and standalone are both optional. Only the version is mandatory. Also, these are not attributes, so if they are present they must be in that order: version , followed by any encoding , followed by any standalone . <?
1 Answer. (a) <? xml version = “1.0”?> is a correct syntax of the declaration.
The XML version element is a value element and stores the data corresponding to the version string in the declaration.
Use version 1.0.
You would only need to use version 1.1 if you are using certain non-ASCII characters in identifiers, EBCDIC line ending characters, or control characters (character codes 1 - 31).
Rationale and list of changes for XML 1.1
XML 1.1 came out of a fanatical desire to be "inclusive" by supporting all the world's languages, including methods of writing Abyssinian that were only used for 15 years nearly a century ago. If you are one of the 99.99999% of the population who doesn't need to capture ancient manuscripts, XML 1.1 is a total waste of time.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With