W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > January to March 2008

Comments on XML 1.0 5th edition

From: Colin Adams <colinpauladams@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:20:58 +0000
Message-ID: <1afdeaec0802260020w52ac85f1y3233c005d9d77bff@mail.gmail.com>
To: xml-editor@w3.org

Like David Carlisle, I too strongly endorse the comments of Elliotte
Harold and James Abley.

If this proposed edition were to be passed unchanged (i.e. without a
change in the version number of XML) then:

1) As the author of an XSLT 2.0 processor, I would amend the
documentation to specifically indicate conformance to Fourth edition
of XML 1.0.
2) I would attempt to veto support for XML 1.0 Fifth edition in the
XML parser used by the processor.
3) If the veto attempt did not suceed, I would have to fork the XML
parser and maintain my own version.

I trust that the proposed edition will not be passed. To do so would
ruin the reputation of the W3C, as it would mean one could no longer
have any trust in their documents.

I am a W3C invited expert to the XSLT working group. To date, I have
regarded that appellation as an honour. But if the proposed edition
were to pass, I could not afford to have my name associated with the
W3C anymore, and subsequently would be forced to withdraw from the
working group.
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 08:21:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:38 GMT