[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 8:43 PM
> To: Tim Bray; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] So maybe ID isn't a problem after all.
> Again, from a practical perspective, I don't need xml:base,
> the stylesheet PI, or any of these other things standardised. I got along
> perfectly welll without them before, and will keep on doing so.
You're not exactly John Q. Webhacker, Gavin! (likewise, Jonathan Borden).
How about the folks who don't develop their own tools and haven't 10 years
of experience with SGML? Would ordinary mortals find some sort of
standardized PI or namespace to define ID-ness helpful?
Would those of us who develop tools and explain how to use them find it
easier to help J. Q. Webhacker and friends declare IDs with DTDs/Schemas, or
with the ID-ness PI/namespace?