[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 7:20 PM +0100 4/3/02, Richard Tobin wrote:
>It's intended that Namespaces 1.1 will be strongly tied to XML 1.1, so
>that it will only apply to XML 1.1 documents. XML 1.0-only parsers
>will reject documents labelled 1.1 anyway, and Namespaces-1.1-aware
>processors will apply Namespaces 1.0 to 1.0 documents and Namespaces
>1.1 to 1.1 documents.
>
This really bothers me, because now it becomes plausible to use XML
1.1 even when only using Unicode 3.0 and earlier. Up till now, I've
had a very simple story to tell about XML 1.1: Are you a native
speaker of Cherokee, Yi, Burmese, Ge'ez, Cambodian, or Dhivehi? Then
you might want to consider XML 1.1. Otherwise, you can safely ignore
it.
This proposal breaks that story. XML 1.1 is solely about fixing up a
few problems with the character sets. It is *not* about new features.
There is no good reason to tie future specifications to it
exclusively.
If features of any kind are going to get tied exclusively to a future
version of XML, then we really need to jump straight to an
incompatible version of XML, e.g. 2.0 that fixes a lot more than
this. If we don't have time to do that right now or aren't sure we
should do that right now, we should wait until we have time and are
sure.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
