[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 04:29:55 -0700
At 08:09 PM 5/23/98 -0700, Charles Frankston wrote:
>> Note that the XML declaration has a required order of pseudo-attribute
>> occurrence. It would be best if the XML-family of language were
>> consistent.
>>
>> [23] XMLDecl ::= '<?xml' VersionInfo EncodingDecl? SDDecl? S? '?>'
>>
>
>Yes, this is a good point about the XML Decl. Does Tim Bray care to comment
>here?
Yes. At the moment, the XML declaration has a required order in which
the bits must appear. However, the namespace declaration, which looks
(on the face of it) remarkably similar, does not. Yes, I find this
irritating. My vote was for the namespace declarations to be strictly
ordered for consistency with the XML declaration, but I lost. My
opinion is that
1. Because the XML spec BNF doesn't have the &-connector, it's hard and
inelegant to specify required-but-unordered; so I didn't bother for
the XML declaration, and neither Michael nor anyone else caught me
on this.
2. My WG colleagues *did* catch this in the namespace declaration, and
were more irritated by the strict ordering than by the inconsistency;
this leads to the current situation.
-Tim
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|