Re: [xml-dev] Ten Years Later - XML 1.0 Fifth Edition?

[Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>]

Elliotte Harold wrote:

> 
> I would suggest a putative XML 2.0 follow roughly Tim Bray's skunkworks 
> proposals. Specifically I'd like to see:
> 

> 3. Expand the list of predefined entity references to include what's 
> defined in HTML and MathML.

Elliotte. You mutter about Unicode changes/stability, just how
stable is this set of entities?

Could this be handled in the same way that you propose for Unicode 
version attributes?
I.e. define them outside of xml 2.0 and reference the 'set' in use
with the version of xml?



regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk