Subject: RE: "Roots" of confusion introduced at W3C (long) From: "Pawson, David" <DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:00:07 +0100 |
DuCharme, Robert snipped very clear differentiation between physical / logical entities. the only bit I'd quibble with is this statement > This failure (and the XML Working Group can't be blamed too much for > it--they set out to design a stripped-down version of SGML > that could be > shipped over the Web more easily than full SGML, and had no > idea of the uses > that people would put XML to) meant that the Working Groups > for additional > XML technologies had to make up and assume certain things, > and this let to > subtle and not-so-subtle conflicts between those additional specs. The > Infoset spec is an attempt to make up for this. These > conflicts are also a > key reason that so many important specs have been held up in > the Candidate > Recommendation stage lately. Perhaps not in the past, but the xml core wg surely could revise to clarify today, and for the future? Is that a task for the info-set WG? Surely XML coordination. Regards DaveP XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: "Roots" of confusion introduced, DuCharme, Robert | Thread | Re: "Roots" of confusion introduced, AndrewWatt2000 |
RE: testing node type, Linda van den Brink | Date | RE: testing node type, Pawson, David |
Month |