RE: Xinclude word-smithing

At 05:35 PM 6/16/2007 -0400, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote:
>Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger!  :)  I was merely observing that
>different WG members (and clearly others outside the WG as well) had
>conflicting opinions about whether XInclude expansion was indeed
>licensed in this case.  So unless the WG chooses to make a decision
>about whether or not XInclude expansion is licensed in this case --
>bearing in mind that the TAG is already addressing exactly this question
>in issue xmlFunctions-34[1] -- then it seems most prudent to me to have
>the test cases be neutral about it.  That's all I was suggesting.

As to licence to use xi:include, any XML processor that supports
the XInclude specification is free to exercise the specification.
No further licence is required or sought. If you have any real interest
in the content of a document, then you are also interested in any
transclusions that it may contain, and so on, as long as you can
follow your nose. That's the web.

If your application or agent chooses to inhibit XInclude processing, use it
to meet your needs. You may get fewer triples than me, but you will
feel confident knowing that you didn't need the extraneous information.

Please do not try to inhibit other applications or agents from elaborating 
the document
as they see fit -- without seeking permission. If I find more triples than you
intended to reveal, next time you'll learn to hide your triples better.

Regards,

Murray

Received on Sunday, 17 June 2007 12:59:37 UTC