Layers, again (was Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation)

[David Megginson]

Simon St.Laurent writes:

 > >There was no warning, however, that DTD syntax might change.
 > 
 > I think you're overestimating the syntax changes being described.
 > A PI would be ignored by parsers that didn't understand it, and
 > james anderson's suggestion of interpreting attribute declarations
 > makes even less impact.  (I don't think that one will necessarily
 > work, however.)

My fault: I didn't realise that your proposed changes used only PIs.
I'm not sure that I see how the documents could still be valid from
the XML 1.0 perspective, though, and if not, the new documents would
still be backwards incompatible with some (many?) existing XML 1.0
implementations.


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)