W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-microxml@w3.org > October 2012

sanity check

From: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:18:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEaz5mvx7vYARb4_SbC+4++-kiJ-PJu6vT9o3DZwTbXk=LM7Pw@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-microxml@w3.org
Hello,

a few random thoughts;

* any comments with respect to microxml and the following ?
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-exi-20110310/
   http://www.w3.org/TR/unicode-xml

* in '5 Security Considerations' we assume that XML Canonization is a
security issue only, we may want to separate this out, pointing out
the various links to http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-c14n11/ . Worried that
this important information is being buried here.

* I think the '1. Introduction' is far too verbose and could do with
stating very clearly the differences in non normative terms with XML
1.0 right up front or perhaps just a link to B.1 Syntax is all that is
needed.

 J
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 06:19:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 October 2012 06:19:19 GMT