- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:21:37 -0000
- To: "'Elliotte Rusty Harold'" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: "'www-tag@w3.org'" <www-tag@w3.org>
There seems to be some question as to whether xml:lang (and maybe xml:base) survive the canonicalisation process. See [1] and thread. Stuart -- [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Jan/0013.html > -----Original Message----- > From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu] > Sent: 3 February 2004 15:11 > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: [xmlChunk-44] Chunk of XML - Canonicalization > and equality > > > At 11:22 PM -0500 2/2/04, Ian B. Jacobs wrote: > >Hello, > > > >At their 2 Feb 2004 teleconference, the TAG accepted a new issue [1]: > > > >xmlChunk-44: Chunk of XML - Canonicalization and equality > > > > Is this XML fragments under another name? That is, what do > you mean by "chunk"? > > Also, how is this not solved by exclusive XML > canonicalization? It seems to me two "chunks" are likely to > be equal if they have the same exclusive XML canonicalization. > > I don't yet see what's new about this issue. > -- > > Elliotte Rusty Harold > elharo@metalab.unc.edu > Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) > http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosi > m/cafeaulaitA >
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2004 10:25:13 UTC