- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 13:34:59 -0800
- To: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Paul Grosso wrote: > One of the design decisions/goals of the XML 1.0 Recommendation [1] > was to have as few optional features as possible [2]. XML 1.0 allows > an XML document to have a prolog that includes some declarations in > what is called the internal subset [3]. > > An important class of XML documents are those that are "standalone" [4]. > In such documents, the only way to provide entity declarations [5] or > attribute defaults [6] is to put such declarations in the internal subset. > > It is my understanding that the Last Call draft of SOAP 1.2 [7] makes > use of an XML format that does not permit any internal subset, despite > the fact that XML 1.0 does not define such a profile/subset of XML. I > wonder what the definition of such profiles by individual specifications > will do for interoperability. Paul, at our meeting of Dec. 2nd, we discussed your issue. As I'm sure you're aware, there is quite a history of discussion on this in the community in general and in XMLP in particular. In the short term, we feel you should direct your issue to the XMLP group so that their reasons for their decision are exposed to public view. We have however taken up a new TAG issue named "XmlProfiles" to address the general issue here; the XML family of recommendations has little in the way of profiling/subsetting mechanisms, and yet we observe persistent requirements from the community (e.g. XMLP in this case) to do profiling and subsetting, in many cases for reasons that seem good. Clearly this issue falls within the scope of the XML Core WG's work so when the TAG gets into this, we'll have to do some liaison. - Tim Bray, on behalf of the TAG
Received on Monday, 2 December 2002 16:34:59 UTC