- From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:21:31 -0400
- To: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Cc: "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 00:55 +0700, James Clark wrote: > I meant to send this to the list, but by mistake sent it just to John. > > Is a MicroXML document that > > - invents its own xml:foo attribute or > > - uses an existing xml:* attribute (say xml:space) in a way that does > not conform to the relevant XML-family spec (eg it says > xml:space="funky") > > ok as far as MicroXML is concerned? I hope so. > > If so that compatible with the fact that eg xml:space="funky" is an > error according to XML 1.0? This feels to me a bit like some of the XML constraints for compatibility with SGML... a note that xml:* element and attribute names are reserved, or should be used compatibly with XML, is sufficient _unless_ you want all well-formed microxml to be well-formed XML (which does seem to follow from the use cases on the wiki), and in that case xml:space="collapse" or xml:mother have to be errors. -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ Co-author: 5th edition of "Beginning XML", Wrox, July 2012
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 18:21:38 UTC