- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:28:21 -0500
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Grosso, Paul > Sent: Thursday, 2007 December 13 9:27 > To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > Subject: XML 1.0 5th Ed and related PEs [was: Minutes for XML > Core WG telcon of 2007 December 5] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org On Behalf Of > François Yergeau > > Sent: Wednesday, 2007 December 12 20:11 > > >> 8. XML 1.0 5th Edition > > Draft 5th Edition is at > > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/12/PER-xml-20071212-review.html > > - I took a first stab at the Status sections, taking inspiration > > from the previous PERs and RECs. Upon reflection, I'd like to augment the status a bit more. To the paragraph that talks about incorporating the changes dictated by the accumulated errata, I'd like to add another sentence something like: In particular, erratum [Exx] relaxes the restrictions on element and attribute names thereby providing in XML 1.0 the major end user benefit currently achievable only by using XML 1.1. where [Exx] is the erratum that [PE160] ends up becoming. paul [PE160] http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/08/proposed-xml10-4e-and-xml11-2e-errata.html#PE160
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 17:30:16 UTC