- From: David G. Durand <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
- Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 11:04:32 -0500
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
We have determined that, for most of the WG, most positions on the ideal whitespace model have not changes significantly... The original proposal was that we examine the current compromise in XML (which like most compromises is sub-optimal to many of us) and the proposed "RE SHORTREF est" proposal that Charles made, and see if, on balance that is less sub-optimal. Michael convinced me that the extra whitespace nodes in tables are not that damaging, and the elimination of whitespace "modes" makes implementation easier, so I think it is better than what we have. I think we should restrict the discussion to the choice between XML's current state, and the alternative proposed (and maybe minor variations of that, if they are crucially important), since we will probably reach closure on the ideal method as soon as we did the last time (i.e. never, given the incompatible demands different groups seem to be making). That's unless anyone has a _new_ argument to make on the topic. -- David I am not a number. I am an undefined character. _________________________________________ David Durand dgd@cs.bu.edu \ david@dynamicDiagrams.com Boston University Computer Science \ Sr. Analyst http://www.cs.bu.edu/students/grads/dgd/ \ Dynamic Diagrams --------------------------------------------\ http://dynamicDiagrams.com/ MAPA: mapping for the WWW \__________________________
Received on Friday, 13 December 1996 10:58:12 UTC