RE: Editor's review copy of XML Namespaces 1.0 Third Edition

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Henry S. Thompson
> Sent: Wednesday, 2009 July 22 7:33
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Editor's review copy of XML Namespaces 1.0 Third Edition
> 
> Now available, in plain and diffed versions.  Please review carefully:
> 
>
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/04/xml-names-2e/xml-names-10-3e.html
>
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/04/xml-names-2e/xml-names-10-3e-diff.ht
ml

Thanks, Henry.

It generally looks good (not counting the front matter, of course).

Comparing the diff version with the errata document, I note:

1.  We turned "attributes unique" into an NSC, but there is no
    corresponding erratum for this.  This doesn't really bother
    me, but I thought I'd mention it.

2.  In Appendix F, you did not include in the PER the Note in
    the erratum that explains production [6].  I think you should,
    as even though I was present during the WG discussion, I had
    already forgotten the explanation as to how production [6] works,
    and I couldn't re-figure it out without reading the Note.

For the next draft, you might want to make a pass on the front
matter.  In any case, I find it very confusing when any draft
contains a date that isn't the current date--it's hard to talk
about the draft of 2009 July 21 that's dated 16 August 2006--so
please at least update the date and the fact that this is an
Editor's Draft of a PER, not a W3C Recommendation.

paul