- From: Eve L. Maler <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:24:28 -0400
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: "Eve L. Maler" <Eve.Maler@east.sun.com>, mrose@invisible.net, spec-prod@w3.org
At 02:53 PM 6/13/00 -0400, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:
>This is actually what I'm most interested in. If you are writing a W3C spec,
>you don't have to worry about the expires field. If you are writing an IETF
>spec you don't have to worry about the latest version field. But if you are
>writing for both it's easy (one document, two XSLTs), and it'll pool our
>experiences in writing a spec schema/dtd for everything else.
So you'd union them? There may be other spec formats we might want to
throw into the mix too, then. E.g., OASIS may have a standard set of
header info for specs submitted to them. Of course, a stylesheet can
extract the relevant fields when it's time to publish.
>I started my unsuccessful path in finding the latest version at:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/spec.dtd
>which states:
>
> ># "http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/DTD/xmlspec.dtd">
> >...
> > For all details, see the design report at:
> > <http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/DTD/xmlspec-report.htm>
>
>Neither of which exist ...
Yeah, I don't know what happened to these. Just use the URLs in my
previous reply for now, and I'll work on this.
Eve
--
Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center elm @ east.sun.com
Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2000 15:24:04 UTC