[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
Rick Jelliffe scripsit: > From: "John Cowan" <cowan@m...> > > > > Under my proposal a Blueberry declaration is legal if and only > > > if one or more Blueberry characters is used in an XML name somewhere in > > > the document. Thus adding a single processing instruction whose target > > > contained a Blueberry character either before or after the root element > > > would make the document Blueberry legal. > > > > Well, I certainly have no problem with this idea. > > I certainly do. It goes against the fundamental principle of labelling. We are not talking about not labelling. The issue is: should a document labelled Blueberry be required to actually exploit at least one Blueberry feature, or is it all right to take a well-formed XML 1.0 document and label it Blueberry without further change? -- John Cowan cowan@c... One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter
|
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
|