IMPORTANT: Fwd: Poll: Relative URIs and Strings in xmlns attributes

I'd like people to send their feedback on Wednesday September 20 (not 30, 
typo on the digit).

So again, let us know how you feel on this issue by _this_ Wednesday. Thanks.

Forwarded Text ----
>Before we request Candidate Rec status for Canonical XML there's one issue 
>that I've been trying to understand and come to closure on, and that's the 
>implications of the recent XML Plenary decision on Canonical XML: "to 
>deprecate the use of relative URI references in namespace declarations." 
>[1] What does that mean for the Canonical Form? We've had some discussion 
>on this over this week in this WG [2], some discussion in the XML 
>Coordination Group, and I also briefly discussed this with TimBL. I think 
>the two options we now face are below. Please post your preference -- and 
>optionally reason/rationale -- by end of day Wednesday September 30th.


__
Joseph Reagle Jr.
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/