Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Brownell <email@example.com>
- To: Andrew Layman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 19:59:40 -0700
Andrew Layman wrote:
> In this list and in others, there have been strong and conflicting
> opinions expressed on what would be the best behavior of a parser, and no
> settled standard exists.
I can't buy this. The W3C specifications for XML and for namespaces are
quite settled ... and _neither_ one places a requirement that declared
"xmlns*" attributes must have "#FIXED" default values.
In fact, the statements that exist make it clear that from the XML 1.0
syntax point of view, "xmlns*" are like other attributes ... which may
be defaulted or not, and hence may omit (or include) "#FIXED" depending
on what a given DTD author chooses to do.
> I do not, in fact, know that the IE5
> rules are the ultimately best rules; what we can say in their favor is that
> because they are conservative, they do not encourage the creation of
> documents that are accepted by MSXML and yet are later rejected by
> conformant parsers after standards have been worked out.
Sound like you're saying it's conservative to treat MSXML as the holder
of the standards, rather than the W3C documents. That's not a very
popular attitude outside of Redmond!
In a standards context, "conservative" means implementing only (and
exactly!) what the specifications say. I don't think this is what
Microsoft has done in this case. Speculating on the reasons why may
be amusing, but I'd rather see this bug fixed (soon!) instead.
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)