[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Feature Manifest (Was:RE: Parser Behaviour (serious))
At 08:57 AM 4/7/00 -0400, THOMAS PASSIN wrote: >So I don't see the objection to using PIs. The specific objection you noted - that PIs show up in browsers - really only applies to XHTML, where browsers use HTML parsers that don't understand PIs. The more general statement that the W3C somehow see PIs as evil is more or less gossip, substantiated publicly only by: "The W3C does not anticipate recommending the use of processing instructions in any future specification." (from Associating Stylesheets) There was also the changeover from PIs to attributes in the Namespaces spec, though in theory that was about scoping, not moral objection to PIs. I'd love to see some kind of official comment on PIs, since I think they'd be extremely useful for a number of tasks, including putting scripts (processing, right?) into XML documents. The status of PIs is an important issue, I think. Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. Building XML Applications Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth http://www.simonstl.com *************************************************************************** This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers. To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ ***************************************************************************
|
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
|