Why not PIs for namespace declarations?

[David Megginson]

"Clark C. Evans" <clark.evans at manhattanproject.com> writes:

> Yet another fundamental question... any insight would be greatly
> apprechiated!

There are a lot of answers to this question, but in the end, the real
argument was that PIs cause display problems in level-3 and level-4
HTML browsers, and some influential parties [1] had a strong interest
in being able to write HTML+XML documents that, by various sorts of
lexical trickery, could still be displayed in XML-oblivious browsers
like Netscape 3.

Yes, I know everything you're going to say, and I probably agree with
all of it.  I've written a couple of Namespace filters, and they'd be
*much* easier if all Namespace declarations appeared in the prolog.


All the best,


David

[1] Who those parties were is confidential, but they were not the Big 
    Evil Companies.

-- 
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 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)