Re: Radical cure for BOS confusion (2 CCs deleted).

David wrote:
| I think we need to allow the processing of multiple documents at a time. I
| don't see that this is hard for any but the simplest of applications...
| This kind of simplification make ilinks useful only for a few things. No
| solution to the annotation problem is going to be based on single-document
| parsing, and that could be one of the real selling points of XML (for
| people other than Terry, who would rather not have this feature).

That's a misrepresentation of my point of view and of what I've
written.  I don't want to forbid all annotation functionality to the world,
I want only to be able to control how my documents may be annotated and
transcluded, in those cases where I have a legal right to do so.  And
in this I have plenty of company.

On another point, "XML BOS" is no help at all.  Hytime invented "BOS";
let's let BOS remain a Hytime term and avoid having to explain how an
"XML BOS" differs from a Hytime BOS every time we use the term.

    Terry Allen    Fujitsu Software Corp.    tallen@fsc.fujitsu.com
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
 which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
  A Davenport Group Sponsor:  http://www.ora.com/davenport/index.html