Re: XML-SW, a thought experiment

At 8:43 PM -0800 2/6/02, Tim Bray wrote:


>to XML-SW, aside from the difficult question of what goes in
><?xml version="?", should in all respects conform to all the W3C
>recommendations that went into it.
>

I'm still reading through, but if this actually works as a pure 
subset of XML 1.0, then we could keep version="1.0" and use a 
processing instruction in the prolog to identify it as an XML-SW 
document. It would be very nice if existing XML parsers could handle 
XML-SW documents without updates.
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
|          The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001)           |
|              http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/              |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/   |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/     |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+

Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 07:32:54 UTC