[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
gtn@rbii.com (Gavin Thomas Nicol) writes:
>On Tuesday 25 February 2003 05:05 pm, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>> >I disagree. As I said at the start of the thread, XML-SW bundles
>> > namespaces, xml:space, xml:lang, xml:base and infoset, which I
>> >think is a mistake.
>>
>> Fair enough. I said it is a place to start. If all of the subset
>> supporters and detractors are arguing about the same document, then
>> that is a satisfactory way to begin. If they can't do that, there is
>> little use in beginning.
>
>I understand your desire, but I think it's best to start minimal and
>build up.
I agree with Gavin on this.
Common XML [1] started with a core - one I now suspect may be too big,
largely because of namespaces - and then described layers beyond that
core.
That might be a good operation to perform on Len's favored XML-SW early
on; I suspect doing that might well lead to the 'unbundling' of
namespaces, xml:xyz, and the infoset.
[1] - http://simonstl.com/articles/cxmlspec.txt
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
