Re: Recent ERB votes
At 12:30 PM 11/6/96 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>In a recent series of mail votes and meetings, the ERB has resolved
>several XML design issues. Under pressure of time, we moved very rapidly
>and votes may not have been fully and exactly recorded where the sense
>of the ERB on some issue became quickly obvious. It is possible that
>ERB members may wish to correct their reported votes. As always,
>accompanying rationales, where present, have not been reviewed by the ERB
>A.22 XML will have no CONREF attributes (11.3.3, 7.3, 220.127.116.11).
>Passed (no CONREF), Kimber and Maler dissenting
I just realized that my vote said "no", which I intended to mean "no
conref", not "no, we will have conref". Oops. Not that it affected the
outcome. But I didn't want people to think I'm so tied to the essoterica
of SGML that I'd vote to keep one of features that precludes
One possible solution that might be worth proposing for SGML97 is a new
attribute specification syntax for conref attributes so that elements with
conref attributes are self describing as for XML empty elements.
W. Eliot Kimber (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Senior SGML Consulting Engineer, Highland Consulting
2200 North Lamar Street, Suite 230, Dallas, Texas 75202
+1-214-953-0004 +1-214-953-3152 fax
http://www.isogen.com (work) http://www.drmacro.com (home)
"Rats in the morning, rats in the afternoon...if they don't go away, I'll be
re-educated soon..." --Austin Lounge Lizards, "1984 Blues"