W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Remarks on W3C Editor's Draft 6 August 2007

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:30:17 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m27inorgti.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| On 8/16/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
|> / Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
|> | I think we should switch to using 'true'/'false' everywhere for option
|> | values, since that's what boolean true/false get converted to as
|> | strings. If we do that, it makes sense (to me) to switch to true/false
|> | everywhere.
|>
|> We agreed to this on the call, but as I set out to implement it, it became
|> pretty clear to me that using xsd:boolean was both easier to specify
|> and consistent with other types, so I did that instead.
|
| But I fear we will have to choose our way for "inherited from
| Serialisation Spec" options (especially standalone and
| omit-declaration)

Bleh. Maybe those remain yes/no?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | If God created us in his own image, we
http://nwalsh.com/            | have more than reciprocated.-- Voltaire

Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 16:29:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT