On 13 December 2010 09:42, James Clark <
jjc@jclark.com> wrote:
> It's designed to be a subset of XML 1.0 but not of XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces.
...I think everyone takes "XML" to mean "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" so
to say something is a "subset of XML" but not mean namespaces you
might get done for false advertising :)
Absolutely not. XML is XML. Possibly
casual observers might confuse "XML" with "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" but
a FAQ is all that's needed to sort that out. The only reason such a
confusion would be important is if it made it too impractical for
existing parsers to handle MicroXML. For all the parsers I know of, it
would work just fine, or need very minor tweaks. Do you know of any
where that is not the case?
For me (and for quite a few who have spoken up on the list, putting
paid to your "everyone" claim), exactly what is needed is something
"designed to be a subset of XML 1.0 but not of XML 1.0 + XML
Namespaces."
