>> ...I think everyone takes "XML" to mean "XML 1.0 + XML Namespaces" soEh? I must have missed something. It sounds like you are saying only
>> 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
a casual observer would think "XML" includes namespaces?
Yes. I am.
> For me (and for quite a few who have spoken up on the list, putting paid toAgain I don't follow. I'm suggesting dropping namespaces completely
> 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."
from the subset.