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

Re: Where can ignored content go?

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:07:27 +0100
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0703161107l34e18ca4h20eeb860b08380cf@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@sun.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

hum...

for p:inline, we can use other documentation strategies (comment, pi
or foreign namespace)
I think the need for documenting is stronger for NON-INLINE content
than for inline

Mohamed

On 3/16/07, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote:
> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
> | I want them to not be empty for documentation purpose
>
> You want to be able to put documentation *inside* p:pipe and
> p:document even though you absolutely can't put it inside p:inline?
>
> I don't feel strongly about it, but it seems to me that the most
> consistent thing to do would be to forbid it in all three places.
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh
> XML Standards Architect
> Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>
>


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 8 72 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Friday, 16 March 2007 18:07:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:50 GMT