> Is that you actual use case? That you *want* to store binary data in XML, instead of getting it properly rejected as non well-formed content?
No, Stefan.

What I was saying in my last message was  just "you're right, the user shall always use repr() when printing an xml tree" (msg196313) because "xml does *not* guarantee to have only printable chars by itself" (msg196368, msg196379).

As an advice I hope you do not take as insult, saying
"in section {section} the spec says {argument}" 
is much more constructive than 
"read the spec on that", "{extremely_obvious_link}",
at least to people not familiar with the spec and asking for the source of your arguments (msg196360). Can shorten threads, too.