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

Re: XML Blueberry

• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:48:57 -0400

On 21 Jun 2001 13:26:31 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> I am not sure what "backwards incompatible" is supposed to mean
> in this context.  Old parsers won't be able to read Blueberry
> documents, that's true.  But nobody needs to write a Blueberry
> document unless they wish to exploit Blueberry features.  And
> upgrading parsers to Blueberry is intentionally trivial: it's basically
> about expanding a few tables.

It almost feels to me like those tables should be the responsibility of
the Unicode folks (or some similarly lucky but separate intermediary
with time on its hands) to maintain, and that some means of
incorporating them by reference might have avoided this entire
discussion.

I guess that would make the layering of XML 1.0 on top of Unicode more
explicit.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Blueberry
    • From: Peter Jacobi <pj@w...>
  • Re: XML Blueberry
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • Re: XML Blueberry
    • From: Vincent-Olivier Arsenault <vincent@n...>

• References:
  • XML Blueberry
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: XML Blueberry
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
  • Re: XML Blueberry
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Escher could have drawn it (Re: XML Schema and Entities)
• Next by Date: Re: XML Blueberry
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Blueberry
• Next by thread: Re: XML Blueberry
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread