XFM (or something similar)

William Lindsey lindsey at diac.com
Wed Dec 1 00:58:34 GMT 1999

Sean McGrath wrote:
> >Do xml-dev'ers think XFM is a good idea?

Tim Bray replied:
> I think having a way for an instance to promise it references no
> entities is a no-brainer.
[ ... snip ... ]

Should we invent yet another way for the instance to tell us about
itself?  We already have the BOM, the XML declaration, the Document
Type declaration, and the XML-Stylesheet PI.  I guess it hasn't
been decided how an instance is associated with a W3C Schema.

Maybe we should investigate a more general way to specify all
this stuff externally. It seems to fit within the scope of
the problem Tim outlines in "Related-Resource Discovery for XML" [1].
Is there a W3C XML packaging activity?



[1] http://www.textuality.com/xml/why-pkg.html

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe 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