- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 14:21:17 -0800
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <28d56ece0702011421r32d16d98s6031e7f0ef211afd@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/1/07, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote: > > > | ...keep in mind that HTML isn't an edge case as there is a lot of it > | hanging around that needs to be processed. > > By XProc, by all implementations, in V1? I'm happy to push this off to future versions as long as we are clear about how our components must not be extended to do so. That sets a clear precedent that our stuff only does what we say and is inter-operable. If you need some customization, you have to give it a new non-inter-operable name. If a group of implementors choose to decide on the same extension components, then authors have some choice. That takes the pressure off us doing every feature and we can roll back into the core those things that make sense. This is much like EXSLT and XSLT 2.0. -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2007 22:21:33 UTC