Re: S production in XML 1.1

Rick Jelliffe scripsit:

> Have the additions needed for supporting Unicode 3.1 now slipped below the level 
> of "changes that force a version-up"?  

I don't think so, given that we are still materially changing the
definition of WF-ness.

John Cowan                                <>    
Yakka foob mog.  Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork.  Chumble spuzz.
    -- Calvin, giving Newton's First Law "in his own words"

Received on Saturday, 13 July 2002 23:18:16 UTC