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

[David Megginson]

Don Park writes:

 > I would like know exactly what W3C's position is on the use of
 > Processing Instruction.

Perhaps we should start a W3C Should-People-Use-PIs Working Group, or
even a PI Activity with several WGs (the PIs-In-Old-HTML-Browsers WG,
the PIs-For-Stylesheets WG, etc.).

Sorry -- Tim's reply is actually a bit more useful.  This is really a
question about people and their (varying) opinions, not about W3C
policy.  Here are the two ends of the spectrum:

1. PIs are probably too useful to drop altogether -- they allow you to 
   do things like mark irregular revision boundaries, invent new
   declaration types, etc.

2. Level-three-browser compatibility is probably too important to drop 
   altogether -- PIs are unlikely to show up in specs that might be
   used on HTML pages (Namespaces, RDF, Stylesheet linking, XHTML).


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

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)