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

Re: Updated draft (another try at consensus)

From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:25:56 -0700
Message-ID: <4828ceec0709111025o507d65fmef8bd325906e2160@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

On 9/11/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> Furthermore, if I understand correctly[3], it would be an acceptable
> compromise to add the detailed descriptions of what actions are
> required on a step-by-step basis to achieve namespace well-formed
> results as a non-normative appendix.

I think that this is not only a "compromise", but an approach that
makes a lot of sense: let's have a general description of how step
ought to behave with regard to namespace fixup (that is section
2.6.1), but if we can provide guidance that we consider useful on how
to implement those rules for specific steps, then we should do this as
well, and a non-normative appendix seems like the right place to do
so.

Alex
-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web 2.0 Forms, open-source, for the Enterprise
http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2007 17:26:05 GMT

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