Correct - there is no way at all of using illegal characters in an XML document. Not CDATA, not character entities. They simply must not appear anywhere.

I agree with Steve that XML compatibility is not the only requirement for a DFDL info set - we should not do anything to make it XML specific in a way that harms it generality. To balance that, I also think that the DFDL Working Group should be paying attention to the issues around XML compatibility, given that DFDL is based on XML Schema and many potential adopters of DFDL will want to know about XML compatibility.

Mike's proposal of mapping illegal characters into the Unicode Private Use Area sounds like a reasonable approach for implementers to use.

regards,

Tim Kimber, DFDL Team,
Hursley, UK
Internet: kimbert@uk.ibm.com
Tel. 01962-816742
Internal tel. 37246742

From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com>,
Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Date: 01/11/2012 15:14
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] proposal: DFDL needs additional function dfdl:characterCode
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org

Turns out the XML char entities are not an escape scheme for putting illegal chars in. E.g.  is illegal even expressed that way.

The char entities are essentially an internationalization hack so you can enter and render any legal character using only a small charset.

On Nov 1, 2012 8:48 AM, "Suman Kalia" <kalia@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
Shouldn't we be using entity references for XML syntactic character found in text/binary data while creating info set and vice versa...

Suman Kalia
IBM Canada Lab
WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead
Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923
Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com

For info on Message broker
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.html

From: Steve Hanson <smh@uk.ibm.com>
To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>,
Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org
Date: 11/01/2012 07:57 AM
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] proposal: DFDL needs additional function dfdl:characterCode
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org

>From WG call minutes 2012-10-30:

"Beyond the scope of DFDL 1.0. Assumption for now is that infoset needs post-processing."

Mike has observed that other software systems "map the illegal characters to/from the Unicode Private Use Area."

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848

From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org,
Date: 04/10/2012 23:39
Subject: [DFDL-WG] proposal: DFDL needs additional function dfdl:characterCode
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org

An important use case for DFDL is converting legacy data to/from XML.

XML 1.0 disallows a bunch of string characters.

If the data contains those characters, then the question arises of what to turn them into that both preserves information content, but also is legal in XML so that you can convert the DFDL infoset into XML without violating XML's constraints.

The natural thing to do is create an element containing the character code of the illegal character, as an integer.

E.g., character code U+0001 would become an element. Such as: <ccode>1</ccode>.

This could be done using a hidden element that is a string, and the element ccode above would have an inputValueCalc that converts the offending character of that string into an integer.

But we need a function dfdl:characterCode(str, pos) : int

The arguments would be a string, and a position (base 1) within that string, and the return result would be the character code of the character in the string at that position. If pos is out of the bounds of the string (i.e., is negative, 0, or too large), then a processing error would occur.

For unparsing the inverse function would also be needed: dfdl:character(intArg) : string. This would return a string containing one character whose codepoint is the intArg.

Example

Consider this data:
123<0>456<1>789<2>123l
where <0> means just one character with codepoint 0, etc.

In hex that would be 313233 00 343536 01 373839 02 313233

The best I can think of for modeling this while preserving all information would end up with XML looking like this:

<nonXMLString>
<fragment><stringData>123</stringData></fragment>
<fragment><nonXMLChar><charCode>0</charCode></nonXMLChar></fragment>
<fragment><stringData>456</stringData></fragment>
<fragment><nonXMLChar><charCode>1</charCode></nonXMLChar></fragment>
<fragment><stringData>789</stringData></fragment>
<fragment><nonXMLChar><charCode>2</charCode></nonXMLChar></fragment>
<fragment><stringData>123</stringData></fragment>
</nonXMLString>

So our nonXMLString is of a type which is array of fragment, a fragment is a choice of either (legal XML) stringData, or a nonXMLChar.

The nonXMLChar has a child element because it will need to convert to from a string so will use inputValueCalc and outputValueCalc to do so, so it needs to be a sequence so that it can have the other hidden elements needed to pull this off.

stringData would have lengthKind="pattern" and a pattern that allows any sequence of XML-allowed characters.

nonXMLChar would have a hidden first child element of type string of explicit length 1 with an assertion that the string match a pattern that is any of the illegal characters (but just one of them). The charCode child element would inputValueCalc to get the character code of the character. For 8 bit encodings it would be ok as a table lookup in XPath, but for unicode..... we'd need a function that returns a character code.

If you just have one embedded illegal character, like NUL, then you could just model it as a separator, which would simplify things considerably (and is possible in a someday XML 1.1 future since NUL is then the only disallowed character.)

But for XML 1.0's illegal characters, we need to be able to convert to/from some non-string representation if we are to preserve information content. Hence we need these additional functions.

--
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair
Tel: 781-330-0412-- dfdl-wg mailing listdfdl-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU-- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU