Closing Blueberry

[Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>]

xml-dev has no authority and is not part of any formal
process, but if it were a W3C WG and I'd been the chair,
at this point I would assert that I hear something like
convergence going on.

a. Seems like history's on the side of people who want to
   get the Unicode X where X>2 stuff into XML NAMEs one way 
   or another.
b. Seems like almost nobody is willing to go to bat 
   very hard for NEL.

There are two good ideas for how (a) might be
achieved:

- John Cowan has proposed a sensible-looking method for
  writing the XML NAME rules by reference to Unicode 
  metadata and thus achieving decoupling from any 
  particular version of Unicode.  I didn't see anyone
  raising problems with Johnn's approach, and lord
  knows there are people here who are qualified to
  spot 'em if they're there.  Of course to use
  this fully, your Blueberry declaration would have to 
  specify which version of Unicode it belonged to.
  [hmm... <foo xml:unicode="3.1">...</foo>?]

- James Clark proposed massively fewer restrictions
  on the composition of names.  On the other hand, 
  there were some pretty strong arguments against this.

As for (b), unless someone is willing to make case 
for opening up deployed systems to pretty massive 
breakage in order to simplify the lives of a small
and shrinking piece of the software development
world... as I said, if this were a WG and I were 
chair I'd suggest an evident lack of consensus in 
favor of this change. -Tim