OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Request for Erratum to XML 1.0 and 1.1 Specs

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

On its merit, I'll need more time to consider this proposal. Maybe it 
would be a reasonable thing for XML 1.1. Maybe it wouldn't.

However, I strongly object to adding this as an erratum to XML 1.0. 
It is not an erratum. There is no room for this proposal in XML 1.0. 
The XML 1.0 working group knew what they were doing and made a 
deliberate decision. They did not make a mistake. Pewrhaps their 
decision was unwise, which is a different issue that could be 
resolved in a new version of XML.

However, the use of the errata process to reopen asked and answered 
questions must be eschewed. Regretabbly there is precedent for using 
errata to change the clear language of the spec (the namespace URI 
for the xml prefix). However, this is a horrid decision that should 
never have happened. Let's not repeat that mistake now.

What you propose is a genuine change to XML, not an erratum. It 
requires a new version of XML. Let's not pretend we're just putting a 
band-aid on the spec when in fact we're doing major surgery without 


   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS