- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:59:26 -0500
- To: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@east.sun.com>
- Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 02:53:32PM -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote: > At 02:28 PM 3/9/01 -0500, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > >[10] http://www.w3.org/2001/03/09-XML-document-production-tools > > Thanks for doing this so quickly! It was either that, or put it on the swamp-like someday pile. > (BTW, I don't find that the use of the word "ontology" clears anything > up... I think "vocabulary" or "markup language" is probably the safest term.) done - picked "vocabulary" so as not to imply (truthfully) that using XMLspec requires exotic tools for a new "markup language". > The HTML versions of the XML 1.0 2e and XLink specs were produced with the > xmlspec.xsl stylesheet that's in CVS. The XML version of the XML Base spec > uses a variant of that stylesheet that Jonathan Marsh created; it's a > subset of the original that hews to the XSLT version that IE supports. done - could you tell me what XSL processor was used on XML 1.0 2e and XLink? I presume IE for XML Base. > Proper spelling of Arbortext these days is with lowercase t's. done > s/SMLspec/XMLspec/ done - picked XMLSpec for consistency. Will switch to XMLspec if that's a better known term. -- -eric (eric@w3.org)
Received on Friday, 9 March 2001 15:59:28 UTC