• To: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@A...>,"Jonathan Robie" <jonathan.robie@s...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 15:25:43 -0800
• Thread-index: AcHQZdCS/QdvhEJOQ7aERzxNe3+zDAAAK21Q
• Thread-topic: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@A...] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:16 PM
> To: 'Jonathan Robie'; xml-dev@l...
> Subject: RE:  Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
> 
> 
> > From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@s...]
> 
> <snip/>
> 
> > Er, do they really call it a "reference implementation"?
> 
> Er, no. But Dare's message "nominating" Microsoft's 
> implementations as good examples of conforming processors 
> somehow got transcribed in my mind into an offer nominating 
> their implementations as reference implementations.
> 
> Sorry. My mistake.
> 
> It would still be terribly nice to see some release notes, 
> though, explaining what's different between 4.0 SP1 and RTM. 
> We've been burned by "bug fix" patches before. I'd like to 
> know why we should upgrade.
> 

I'm working on getting this out as soon as possible. 

-- 
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. 
You assume all risk for your use. (c) 2001 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.

• Prev by Date: RE: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
• Next by Date: RE: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
• Previous by thread: RE: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
• Next by thread: RE: Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread