Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:29:09 -0500
At 04:37 PM 3/4/99 -0800, Don Park wrote:
>>Of course, if you seriously believe that the spec is useless unless it
>>allows multiple fragment bodies per package, then that is a comment you
>>should make and attempt to support. We don't want to come out with a
>>spec folks think is useless, but we were trying to keep it as minimal
>>as possible while still addressing the problem we defined as our scope.
>I found the spec very useful, timely, and clear. It was not my intention to
>delay, divert, or hamper the progress of the XML Fragment spec. It was also
>not my intention to imply that the WG overlooked something important.
>I withdraw my comment since it does not fall under the intended scope of the
While you may be withdrawing the comment because of the scope the XML
Fragment group has set itself, we still need a way to represent multiple
fragments, whether or not the W3C considers that appropriate to the scope
of this particular working group.
Sounds like we need to get the XML streaming thread going again, and start
working out ways to represent multiple documents/fragments. It seems like
a real need.
Is anyone interested in this issue going to be at XTech next week? It'd be
culture shock to actually talk, I know, but that might be a good place to
get a spec for these streaming XML issues kickstarted.
XML: A Primer / Building XML Applications (April)
Sharing Bandwidth / Cookies
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)