- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:23:29 -0400
- To: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Cc: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>, public-microxml@w3.org
James Clark scripsit: > How so? Our compatibility requirements relate to XML 1.0 only, not XML > 1.0 + XML Namespaces. True. But the claim that we are using XML syntax in order to allow the XML toolchain to operate on our documents loses much of its rhetorical force if we allow documents to violate the namespace rules. That doesn't mean we shouldn't allow it, necessarily. It's just a factor in the choice. -- If I read "upcoming" in [the newspaper] John Cowan once more, I will be downcoming http://www.ccil.org/~cowan and somebody will be outgoing. cowan@ccil.org
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 15:23:51 UTC