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

Re: UTF-8+names

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: UTF-8+names
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:01:42 -0400
• In-reply-to: <3F92ECF7.6070805@t...>
• References: <3F92D97C.804@p...><20031019034635.91162.qmail@w...><3F92A169.60903@p...><20031019171750.GI20059@m...><3F92D97C.804@p...>

At 12:58 PM 10/19/2003 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>There are substantial communities - remarkably unrepresented here on 
>xml-dev - who have been complaining vociferously because neither W3C XML 
>Schemas nor RelaxNG shows any sign of addressing the entity problem, and 
>they claim they really need them, mostly for this problem of naming 
>characters.  If nothing else, +names is a thought experiment which should 
>clarify these peoples' issues.  So far we've heard a few voices saying 
>"this might be useful" and a few saying "This is an abomination". So far 
>we haven't really heard very much from the constituencies whose issues 
>this is designed to address.

I'm not sure why you're writing off xml-dev's value so quickly.  A lot of 
people here, myself included, deal with these issues every time we work 
with XML.

So whose input do you actually value?

>If this silence continues, the conclusion will be obvious.

And what conclusion would that be?  Lack of interest?

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: UTF-8+names
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• References:
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Re: UTF-8+names
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: UTF-8+names
• Next by Date: RE: UTF-8+names
• Previous by thread: Re: UTF-8+names
• Next by thread: RE: UTF-8+names
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread