On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 05:10:11PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > I see no reason, given that we at least de-emphasizing XML 1.1, to give > it this kind of extensibility until there is a proven need. It seems to me that it's a good way to allow for the (slight) possibility of an XML 1.2 in the future, without doing any harm in the mean-time. It also improves the fiction about any XML processor being able to handle any XML document. I wouldn't want to lose the proposed changes to name characters because of lack of consensus over versioning, though. Best, Liam -- Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ * http://www.fromoldbooks.org/Received on Friday, 28 December 2007 04:05:44 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:37 GMT