Re: draft partitioning of the issues

On Monday, June 25, 2001, at 05:04  PM, pat hayes wrote:

>>> Which is maybe not how some folks would like it to be.  If we 
>>> considered
>>> introducing this change, do you think we would need a syntax 
>>> change to
>>> represent it?  Of course, anyone can now use data uri's now if 
>>> they want to.
>>> We don't have to do anything to support that.
>>
>> No, I do not think a syntax change is necessary. This is 
>> simply a change to the abstract syntax.
> ?? Surely a change to the abstract syntax is likely to require 
> a change in any concrete syntax ??

I don't see why -- only a change in the interpretation of the 
concrete syntax. With this proposal of simplification, the 
expressive power of the current XML syntax is only greatened, 
not lessened.

--
       "Aaron Swartz"      | ...schoolyard subversion...
  <mailto:me@aaronsw.com>  |  <http://aaronsw.com/school/>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> | because school makes kids dumb