- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:13:14 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Robin Berjon wrote: >You're going to need detailed references here, for as far as I can tell >from reading the XML 1.1 specification, an XML 1.0 document is indeed an >XML 1.1 document as well. I see no contradiction there. XML 1.0 documents do not match http://www.w3.org/TR/xml11/#NT-prolog as explained in section 1.3 of the current XML 1.1 Recommendation. >> Please consider me dissatisfied with this response aswell; without any >> detail on the changes, I cannot decide whether the changes are satis- >> factory to me, and fixing stray references to XML 1.0 does not address >> my concern about unclear data typing at all. > >Since the SVG specification now references XML 1.1 normatively >throughout, it is clear that any mention of a data construct imported >from XML is from XML 1.1. Due to the problem above I am not sure what to make of this response. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 13:13:23 UTC