Lists Home |
Date Index |
--- Evan Lenz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Indeed. The bare minimum requirements for a
> non-validating XML parser
> are unambiguous and hardly onerous. I'm tired of
> people making gross
> generalizations and using them as excuses for
> nonconformance, as if the
> complexity of the XML rec approached that of WXS.
So why do you think they are bothering to implement
only a subset if full compliance is "hardly onerous?"
It would be real nice to hear from someone on the
Expert Group on this matter, hint, hint, if you're
lurking out there. Don't worry, the humiliation from
being abused on xml-dev only stings for a little while