Namespaces and XML validation

[Simon St.Laurent]

Murray Altheim writes:
>Unfortunately, I do not believe 
>compatibility with XML 1.0 validation is on the minds of all participants
>and see a schism arising: XML 1.0 compatible, and XML-subset compatible.

And Peter Murray-Rust writes:
>Subset? 

Have to admit, I'm falling toward the subset camp.  I talk a lot about 'simple 
XML', which is just the instance syntax without declarations of any kind 
except the XML one of course.  I tried writing about the layer in between that 
and what I consider the 'meat' of validation, elements and attributes, and 
can't say I was happy, though I completed the exercise.

I'll stick with XML 1.0 - all this time figuring out its quirks, and I'll 
still admit to liking it - but I can certainly understand why a lot of people 
could get along with just a subset.  I'd have been a lot more comfortable with 
a three layer spec, for

-instance syntax
-structural declarations
-minimization declarations

But I can always pray for that next time around.

Simon St.Laurent
Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies


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