Namespaces and XML validation
Simon St.Laurent
SimonStL at classic.msn.com
Tue Aug 11 03:50:37 BST 1998
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)
More information about the Xml-dev
mailing list