W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > October 2004

Re: [Serial] I18N WG last call comments [11] (qt-2004Feb0362-08)

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:47:32 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20041026153832.04f49cc8@localhost>
To: Henry Zongaro <zongaro@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org

Hello Henry,

The I18N WG has looked at the response below.

We looked at two documents:
       http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xslt-xquery-serialization-20031112/
       http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xslt-xquery-serialization-20040723/
The LC version says 'value is implementation defined'.
The new WD doesn't even say that (or we haven't found it).
Your email below is written as if it was 'yes' by default.
We think that (default 'yes') would be the right thing to do.
If the spec indeed uses 'yes' as the default, please send
us a pointer to the place where it does. If not, we would not
be satisfied with this resolution.

Regards,    Martin.


At 23:57 04/09/08, Henry Zongaro wrote:
 >Martin,
 >
 >     In [1], you submitted the following comment on the Last Call Working
 >Draft of XSLT 2.0 and XQuery 1.0 Serialization on behalf of the I18N
 >Working Group:
 >
 ><<
 >[11] Section 3, 'include-content-type': Why is this parameter needed?
 >   It seems that it may be better to always include a <meta> element.
 >   Please remove the parameter or tell us when/why it's necessary to
 >   not have a <meta> element
 >>>
 >
 >     Thanks to you and the working group for this comment.  The XSL and
 >XML Query Working Groups discussed the comment, and noted that there are
 >many situations in which users have found there to be a need for the
 >include-content-type parameter.  A user might not want the serialization
 >process to produce a META element because some post-processing phase will
 >be responsible for creating that element or because the sequence that is
 >input to serialization already contains such a META element that the user
 >would like the serialization process to preserve.  Users sometimes find it
 >necessary to do this in order to work around bugs in web server software.
 >
 >     The working group decided that no change to the Serialization draft
 >was necessary.
 >
 >     May I ask you to confirm that this response is acceptable to the I18N
 >Working Group?
 >
 >Thanks,
 >
 >Henry [On behalf of the XSL and XML Query Working Groups]
 >[1]
 >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/0362.html
 >------------------------------------------------------------------
 >Henry Zongaro      Xalan development
 >IBM SWS Toronto Lab   T/L 969-6044;  Phone +1 905 413-6044
 >mailto:zongaro@ca.ibm.com 
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2004 07:28:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:56 UTC