[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
- To: xml-dev <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 20:22:05 -0400 (EDT)
Paul Prescod writes:
> You keep repeating that it makes your life so much harder but what would
> be so brutal about standardizing and recognizing an equivalence
> declaration? For HTML's simple idea of equivalence, it would be trivial.
It's going to be brutal just getting people to create well-formed
XHTML documents and to include the Namespace declaration; getting
software developers to recognize all three XHTML Namespaces (even if
doing so requires only a three lines of code) will be all the more
difficult, and introduces three times the opportunity for bugs and for
interoperability problems because of omissions.
> > Fortunately, XML isn't source code (or compiled code), so we don't
> > have the same problem
>
> We have exactly the same problem. Assumptions about the form of the
> input may cease to be valid when the input's version number
> shifts.
This will be the third time that I've mentioned that I agree that some
sort of versioning is useful. Most processors won't care most of the
time, so the versioning shouldn't take a form that makes their life
harder, but what's wrong with a 'version' attribute in the HTML
Namespace? Processors that don't need it can ignore it, and those
that do need it can still get the information they need.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson david@megginson.com
http://www.megginson.com/
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)
|