W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > March 2006

RE: RDDL document (was: Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2006 March 29

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:14:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D30202CA3554@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org>
Cc: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

Thank you for correcting me here.

If I've got it straight now, John is proposing replacing
the contents of the web resource found at
http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace
with what's at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Mar/att-0076/
namespace.xhtml

Any comments on this?  

paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 2006 March 29 10:53
> To: Grosso, Paul
> Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: xml: RDDL document (was: Minutes for XML Core WG 
> telcon of 2006 March 29
> 
> Grosso, Paul scripsit:
> 
> > > Francois had comments:
> > > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Mar/0059
> > > 
> > > JohnC had comments:
> > > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Mar/0060
> > 
> > NOTE:  The above comments were really about the Namespaces
> > spec itself and should therefore be taken as PE against NS 1.0
> > (and 1.1).
> 
> Actually no; they were about the RDDL document *at* the xml: namespace
> URI, namely http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace .  We should fix this
> and get it republished by W3C.  I've attached a proposed revision.
> 
> (Alas, "namespace document" and "Namespace document" sound the same on
> the phone.)
> 
> -- 
> John Cowan  cowan@ccil.org  www.ccil.org/~cowan
> Female celebrity stalker, on a hot morning in Cairo:
> "Imagine, Colonel Lawrence, ninety-two already!"
> El Auruns's reply:  "Many happy returns of the day!"
> 
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 17:14:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:33 GMT