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

Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>,XML Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:46:39 -0500
• In-reply-to: <p04330103ba7eee3ac664@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <a7.2ecd0d0e.2b8a809c@a...> <20030223161005.Q16255@r...><oprk2ghnaeezizxn@s...> <p04330103ba7eee3ac664@[192.168.254.4]>
• User-agent: Opera7.0/Win32 M2 build 2637

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:33:38 -0500, Elliotte Rusty Harold 
<elharo@m...> wrote:


> It might be some improvement (is it better to reject some well-formed 
> documents or accept some malformed ones?)  but not enough. I'm not 
> willing to settle for less than full conformance to the minimum level of 
> XML 1.0.


I for one would find it very interesting if they were to implement the XML- 
SW profile, as long as they call it a subset of XML 1.0  of course, and 
don't imply that it will ever have standing as a W3C Recommendation.  BTW, 
if the J2ME folks who may be listening don't catch the reference to "XML- 
SW" we're talking about http://www.textuality.com/xml/xmlSW.html.

I suspect Tim will be happiest if people pay very careful attention to the 
"Status of this document" section :-)

• References:
  • Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...
  • Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Next by Date: RE: Re: Are the data users happy? Why not?
• Previous by thread: Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Next by thread: Re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread