[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Debating "civil disobedience" againstoverlycomplicatedspecs
- From: Evan Lenz <email@example.com>
- To: Sean McGrath <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:36:03 -0700
That indeed would be an interesting XML conformance experiment. However, I
was referring to precedents of specification rather than precedents of
implementations' conformance levels. SOAP is the first specification I've
heard of that treats DOCTYPE declarations as errors. Are there any other
specifications that do this?
----- Original Message -----
From: Sean McGrath <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Debating "civil disobedience" against
> At 01:43 24/09/2001 -0700, Evan Lenz wrote:
> >I know of no other vocabulary that calls itself an application of XML in
> >which I do not have the freedom, if I so choose, to declare an internal
> >subset in order to declare an internal entity.
> Now that would make a *very* interesting experiment.
> How many of the following do the right thing with
> internal document type declaration subsets?
> XHTML Browsers
> XML-RPC Servers
> WAP Gateways (WML Processors)
> JXTA (XML "subset")
> RSS clients
> SVG browsers
> WSDL processors