- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:40:24 -0500
- To: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@topologi.com>, "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM> To: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@topologi.com> Cc: <www-tag@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:07 AM Subject: Re: PIs considered harmful Was: XML-SW, a thought experiment > / "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@topologi.com> was heard to say: > [...] > | If we say that a document should have integrity even if > | all PIs are removed, then a PI for namespace declarations > | must be inappropriate. > > I think that's a circular argument. If we'd used PIs for namespace > declarations, we wouldn't be asking for (or expecting) integrity if we > removed all the PIs :-) Yes you would, as that is the one axiom of PIs and the reason they are used - that they can be removed/ignored without harm. Tim > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | Everything we love, no doubt, will pass away, > XML Standards Engineer | perhaps tomorrow, perhaps a thousand years > XML Technology Center | hence. Neither it nor our love for it is any > Sun Microsystems, Inc. | the less valuable for that reason.--John > | Passmore >
Received on Monday, 4 March 2002 14:41:37 UTC