What is W3C's official position on use of PI?

[Don Park]

> As I said in that message, the important thing about processing
> instructions is that they are invisible to content models. If XML Schemas
> invented a way to make elements invisible to content models (like SGML's
> inclusion exceptions, but maybe only allowed at the top level) and a way
> to add these inclusions to existing schemas easily then processing
> instructions could be replaced by these "floating", element types. That
> would be neat.

I entirely agree with your opinion.  Liam's view is that of concern over
misuse where I am more concerned with functionality.  I believe XML
community can benefit from a guideline for proper use of PI as well as some
mechanism for registering PI target names.   Meanwhile we need to encourage
HTML browsers to recognize PI so that we do not lose this important feature
of XML.

Best,

Don Park



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)