• To: Aaron Skonnard <aarons@d...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:15:05 -0700
• Cc: "'John Cowan'" <jcowan@r...>, "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>
• References: <001d01c24f83$e2926430$0600a8c0@gandalf>

How about turning something like this into a finding or NOTE or
something:

http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200204/msg00170.html

Joe defines "sanity" and then says:

"QNames in content are a lot easier to process in a sane document.
Sanity guarantees that a given QName means the same thing wherever
it appears.  Any future markup vocabulary which uses QNames in content
should include sanity as an application requirement."

That's a start.

As the idea gains currency we could push towards a new version of the
namespaces spec that encourages (and perhaps one day requires) sanity
everywhere.
-- 
 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• References:
  • RE: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Linking global context
• Next by Date: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Previous by thread: RE: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Next by thread: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread