I recently downvoted two questions for a lack of fundamental research (with a comment explaining why). Is that a valid reason? To be specific:
Someone had an ampersand embedded in an XML attribute without encoding. The parser gave a clear error message pointing exactly (row and column) at the ampersand. Googling for "xml ampersand" reveals a raft of autocomplete choices that lead the right way.
Someone posted a wad of XML, wanted to parse it in Java with DOM, and wanted someone to provide an example. Googling for "xml dom parse java example" gets a lot of good hits.
What do you think?
In the long run, I hope that I'm doing the author a favor, by encouraging them to develop research skills they really need.
On the other hand, in the first instance, it turned out that the author had googled for "xml attribute ampersand" and wandered off into the weeds, because the issue isn't specific to attributes. An easy mistake to make. I can't remove the downvote, but that's a different topic.