[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1

• To: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Subject: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• From: Adam Turoff <ziggy@p...>
• Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:33:05 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200204031820.TAA14729@m...>
• References: <3CAB42D4.1030402@d...> <200204031820.TAA14729@m...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.3.25i

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 07:20:21PM +0100, Richard Tobin wrote:
> It's intended that Namespaces 1.1 will be strongly tied to XML 1.1, so
> that it will only apply to XML 1.1 documents.  XML 1.0-only parsers
> will reject documents labelled 1.1 anyway, and Namespaces-1.1-aware
> processors will apply Namespaces 1.0 to 1.0 documents and Namespaces
> 1.1 to 1.1 documents.

Then why do we need a requirements document for Namespaces 1.1 per se?

Is there a good argument why Namespaces-1.1 *shouldn't* be rolled
into the XML-1.1 req/draft?  So what if XML-1.1 is a few pages
larger; the post-hoc addition of Namespaces to XML has caused a
lot of problems over the years.  

Removing an external requirement/dependency should be a *good* thing here.

Z.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>

• References:
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread