W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-editor@w3.org > December 2002

RE: FW: XML Query WG Feedback on Sept WD of Namespaces in XML 1.1

From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:44:47 -0800
Message-ID: <5C39F806F9939046B4B1AFE652500A3A03CA9C9B@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Cc: "Richard Tobin" <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, "Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, "Kay Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>, "XML Core WG" <w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <w3c-xml-query-wg@w3.org>, <xml-names-editor@w3.org>

Great to hear that. Note that all these were hypothetical examples based
on earlier discussions and proposals. All similarity to existing WDs is
purely coincidential :-).

Best regards
Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 21:13 PM
> To: Michael Rys
> Cc: Richard Tobin; John Cowan; Paul Grosso; Kay Michael; XML Core WG;
w3c-
> xml-query-wg@w3.org; xml-names-editor@w3.org
> Subject: Re: FW: XML Query WG Feedback on Sept WD of Namespaces in XML
1.1
> 
> Michael Rys scripsit:
> 
> > One example would be that XML 1.1 would have to be NFC normalized.
> 
> Not so.  XML 1.1 should (not must) be normalized, but non-normalized
> documents
> are still well-formed (if they meet the requirements).
> 
> > Another example would be to limit acceptable name characters
> > (disregarding the welcome fix of : in names) in 1.1.
> 
> On the contrary, we are greatly extending them.
> 
> --
> Yes, chili in the eye is bad, but so is your    John Cowan
> ear.  However, I would suggest you wash your
jcowan@reutershealth.com
> hands thoroughly before going to the toilet.
> http://www.reutershealth.com
>         --gadicath
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Received on Friday, 6 December 2002 13:45:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:43 GMT