On 13 December 2010 09:42, James Clark <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Andrew Welch <email@example.com> wrote:
...I think everyone takes "XML" to mean "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" so
Absolutely not. XML is XML. Possibly casual observers might confuse "XML" with "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" but a FAQ is all that's needed to sort that out. The only reason such a confusion would be important is if it made it too impractical for existing parsers to handle MicroXML. For all the parsers I know of, it would work just fine, or need very minor tweaks. Do you know of any where that is not the case?
For me (and for quite a few who have spoken up on the list, putting paid to your "everyone" claim), exactly what is needed is something "designed to be a subset of XML 1.0 but not of XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces."
Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net
Poetry ed @TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format