W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2009

Re: XML namespaces on the Web

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:01:35 +0100
Message-ID: <4B040C4F.1080407@gmx.de>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
CC: Liam Quin <liam@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
Julian Reschke wrote:
> Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> ...
>> I've been trying to figure out where exactly the disagreement between 
>> us lies, but I think we can all agree on the following:
>> 1. There are applications that have the need and/or desire to implement
>>    non-draconian error recovery for documents created with the
>>    intention of being XML, but for whatever reason are not well-formed.
>> 2. In order to achieve interoperability among such applications, it is
>>    necessary to have a specification that clearly defines how to parse
>>    documents intended to be XML and recover from any fatal errors.
>> ...
> For the record, I do not support 1), thus also not 2).
> BR, Julian

Clarifying: I disagree with "...we can all agree on ... they have a need 
to implement non-draconian...".

In IRC, RSS was pointed out as an example; as far as I can tell, that's 
the only case where content reliably is broken (is it still?), but given 
the history of the various RSS dialects, I really have trouble including 
those into the family of XML vocabularies :-)

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 18 November 2009 15:02:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:03 UTC