• To: "'michael.h.kay@n...'" <michael.h.kay@n...>, 'Tim Bray' <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: xmlns:xml = "???"
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:15:20 -0600

Agreed as long as the spec author has some reasonable 
notion of what the provenancing organization can control. 
Otherwise, it becomes wishful thinking or the author 
has to set about increasing the scope of control of 
the organization.

Life is too short to spend all morning in the closet 
looking for the tailored shirt if all I have to do 
is go sit at a desk and type. :-)

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kay [mailto:michael.h.kay@n...]

> Lots of stupid things are legal.  Lots of not so stupid
> things aren't.
>
And the spec needs to make it absolutely clear which stupid things are legal
and which aren't. I'm not at all comfortable with Tim's answer, which I read
as: "This is legal but stupid, so it would be OK to produce an error
message".

• Prev by Date: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Next by Date: PUBLIC id in notations
• Previous by thread: RE: xmlns:xml = "???"
• Next by thread: GPSml first public version posted.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread