Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

encoding/xml: update character ranges for names to fifth edition (2008) specification #28124

iand opened this issue Oct 10, 2018 · 3 comments


Copy link

commented Oct 10, 2018

Currently the validation of XML names is based on the original 1998 specification which defines a large set of codepoint ranges that are to be accepted. These ranges were widened and simplified in the fifth edition of the spec, published in 2008 and now the current version.

The name production rules are now:

NameStartChar  ::=       ":" | [A-Z] | "_" | [a-z] | [#xC0-#xD6] | [#xD8-#xF6] | 
                           [#xF8-#x2FF] | [#x370-#x37D] | [#x37F-#x1FFF] | 
                           [#x200C-#x200D] | [#x2070-#x218F] | [#x2C00-#x2FEF] | 
                           [#x3001-#xD7FF] | [#xF900-#xFDCF] | [#xFDF0-#xFFFD] | 
NameChar       ::=       NameStartChar | "-" | "." | [0-9] | #xB7 | 
                           [#x0300-#x036F] | [#x203F-#x2040]
Name           ::=       NameStartChar (NameChar)*
Names          ::=       Name (#x20 Name)*
Nmtoken        ::=       (NameChar)+
Nmtokens       ::=       Nmtoken (#x20 Nmtoken)*

This may also address the majority of the requirements for xml1.1 support (#25755) since the changes between 1.0 and 1.1 were the expansion of the name character ranges, the addition of two line ending characters (U+0085, U+2028) and specification of additional normalisation rules

The current ranges span 300 lines of code in the xml package so changing this will also contribute to #26775

If there is interest then I can submit a CL.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Oct 23, 2018

CC @rsc


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 6, 2019

Is this something that could be considered for 1.14 @rsc? I'm happy to submit a CL if it's accepted as a desired feature.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 6, 2019

I'll mark it as a proposal so that the proposal group will see it to make a decision.

@bcmills bcmills added Proposal and removed NeedsDecision labels Jun 6, 2019

@bcmills bcmills modified the milestones: Unplanned, Proposal Jun 6, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.