• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:08:04 -0500

In less moderate terms, that is the kind of reasoning 
by which we began to ignore aspects of ISO 8879 and 
markup developed by practice, the results of which 
were XML.

Simon is right.  Ignore the spec and do the right 
thing.  That is the historically correct response 
to organizations that cannot fix their own mistakes.

len

From: Richard Tobin [mailto:richard@c...]

I think I agree with Simon on this, though naturally in more moderate
terms.

<snip>

I'm sure we'll have widespread support if we make it an amendment to
Namespaces 1.0.

Yes, I'm joking of course.  I really think it's too late to change it,
and the most reasonable workaround is to always use the prefixed form
when it exists.

• Prev by Date: RE: Empty tag with attribute effective for parsing?
• Next by Date: Trust
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Next by thread: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread