[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 07:20:21PM +0100, Richard Tobin wrote:
> Then why do we need a requirements document for Namespaces 1.1 per se?
>
> Is there a good argument why Namespaces-1.1 *shouldn't* be rolled
> into the XML-1.1 req/draft? So what if XML-1.1 is a few pages
> larger; the post-hoc addition of Namespaces to XML has caused a
> lot of problems over the years.
>
> Removing an external requirement/dependency should be a *good* thing here.
Well, while Namespaces-1.1 may be strongly tied to XML-1.1, it is not
necessarily true the other way around. If Namespaces were to be rolled into
XML, then Namespaces would have to be implemented along with XML just to be
able to say that a product is XML-1.1 compliant.
---
Seairth Jacobs
seairth@seairth.com
|
