Re: SDATA, again

Jon recently wrote:

>The technical intricacies are over my head, but the procedural
>situation is pretty simple: the ERB examined this subject in great
>detail and came to the conclusion that the SDATA mechanism as it
>stands in 8879 is not specified well enough to be usable and that we
>are not the right group to provide an optimum replacement.  Our plan
>is to include SDATA on a list of items that we urgently wish ISO to
>consider and to include it in XML when ISO has fixed it.

I.e., in the revision, not in any earlier TC.  (Personal opinion.)


Dave Peterson
SGMLWorks!

davep@acm.org

Received on Monday, 9 December 1996 17:49:19 UTC