I'm not sure what you expect from the W3C if you don't point to some consensus. Saying everyone has issues with the Namespaces in XML recommendation and its side effects doesn't a plan of action make. It's not like they can say, "Oops we made a boo boo, throw out all your code and applications that use Namespaces because we've come up with W3C XML Disambiguators or something"
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Skonnard [mailto:]
Sent: Thu 8/29/2002 9:59 AM
To: 'John Cowan'
Cc: 'Simon St.Laurent';
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: [xml-dev] linking, 80/20]
Well since I'm not privy to how you measure such things at the W3C, I
can't say if what's been expressed on this list officially constitutes
consensus (probably not) but in my interactions with developers
everywhere, and from what was expressed (again) in the recent threads
relating to namespaces, from my perspective there seems to be strong, if
unofficial, consensus that the namespaces specification, as it sits
today, has caused major problems.
-aaron
...................................................
Aaron Skonnard, DevelopMentor (http://skonnard.com)
Essential XML Quick Reference now available online!
http://www.develop.com/books
..................................................
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
