empty tags and the XMl 1.0 spec

John Cowan cowan at locke.ccil.org
Fri Mar 12 19:22:34 GMT 1999

Kay Michael wrote:

> Yes. Section 1.2, terminology, says that all sentences beginning with "For
> interoperability" can be safely ignored unless you are interested in getting
> your document through a piece of software that wasn't written to process
> XML.

I have already bitched to xml-editor at w3.org about the use of
"For interoperability" and "must" in the same sentence, suggesting
that "should" is the correct modal verb.  All other uses of "F.i."
use "should".

John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan at ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

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 (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