Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Ann Navarro <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>, "XML-Dev Mailing list" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 12:10:17 -0400
At 11:55 AM 8/30/99 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>>'weak validation' or 'weak conformance' has been discussed at length, and
>>found to be a very, very bad idea.
>I find answers like this hazardous. 'has been discussed at length' by who?
> The usual band of folks who who have used SGML for the decade or more? Or
>by developers looking for a way to use schemas without binding themselves
>into a straitjacket?
Part of the problem here is what is and what isn't confidential discussions
in a WG. If this were a W3C-internal list, I could be more forthcoming, but
as I said earlier, I tend to err on the side of caution there.
As for XHTML 1.0 -- being a reformulation of HTML 4.0 into XML, the black
and white valid or not stance remained.
As to future work.....I can only comment on public drafts.
Author of Effective Web Design: Master the Essentials
Coming in September --- Mastering XML
Founder, WebGeek Communications http://www.webgeek.com
Vice President-Finance, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
Director, HWG Online Education http://www.hwg.org/services/classes
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)