Re: are all strings in a sequence valid potential QNam
[eek, having mailer problems, I hope this only goes out once] On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 06:11 +1030, Justin Johansson wrote: [...] > It is with a certain amount of regret that I now feel unreasonably > "swayed by the blogs". Further, I now understand that there was > little other choice that could have been made in giving the users > what they wanted. Hopefully over time, any specs that remain > out of sync will be brought into line. Thanks for the response. At W3C we are slowly bringing other specs into line where necessary, e.g. namespaces. Some specs were already OK because they simply referred to "the latest edition" of XML. > To conclude my interest in the topic though, can you please say > exactly what will happen to the XML 1.1 rec. Will it now be > depreciated or repealed? Although it is not widely used, XML 1.1 did allow us to change the way namespaces worked very slightly -- in an XML 1.1 document you can "undeclare" a namespace; for that reason, XML 1.1 may linger on for a while, although no final decision has been made. It doesn't affect XSL-FO particularly; for XSLT 2, the XPath data model shared with XQuery (XDM) has an option for XML 1.1 support, but at least this means we know that 5e isn't going to break the XPath grammar. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
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