XML Property Set

[Peter Murray-Rust]

In message <01BC7EB7.10467860.jtauber at jtauber.com> "James K. Tauber" writes:
> 
> About a month ago I started making a list of those classes and properties 
> from the SGML Property Set that were appropriate to XML. I got through 
> about half of the classes the first night and then didn't touch it until 
> now.
> 
> With all this talk about XML groves, it is worth me finishing off the list?

In my grove-illiterate opinion, yes!  The PropertySet is a sword of Damocles
hanging over these discussions.  It's clear that we can't have all 70+ 
properties.  IF (and I hope it's not a big IF) we can agree on a subset
of the property set then we don't have this problem dissipating the discussion
every time we get close :-)

James Clark came up with a grove subset about 3 months back (have a look in
March xml-dev) in response to one of my typical blunderings for information.  
It looked simple (I can't tell if it was comprehensive) and imagine it
is fairly close to what we require. Unfortunately no-one seemed to take it
up.  So do JamesC and JamesT converge on a common solution?  If they do, why 
not freeze this as an alpha version of the propertySubSet...??

	P.



-- 
Peter Murray-Rust, domestic net connection
Virtual School of Molecular Sciences
http://www.vsms.nottingham.ac.uk/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa at ic.ac.uk)