W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

RE: XML Infoset Comment Resolution: issue-query-*

From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:59:13 -0800
Message-ID: <EC67B042372C27429014D4FB06AC9FAF02627152@red-msg-29.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Arnaud Le Hors" <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org>, "W3C XML Query WG" <w3c-xml-query-wg@w3.org>
My apologies. Let me end the third paragraph :-):

> In the second case, I personally still dissent but would 
> accept moving to CR if the concrete example given in the 
> thread [1] that shows the XSLT behaviour in dealing with 
> in-scope namespaces is included in. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Rys 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:37 AM
> To: 'Arnaud Le Hors'
> Cc: www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org; W3C XML Query WG
> Subject: RE: XML Infoset Comment Resolution: issue-query-*
> 
> 
> Dear Arnaud
> 
> I sent two set of questions: an official one from the Query 
> WG and a private one that concerns itself with the inscope 
> namespace property that I feel is superfluous.
> 
> In the first case I have not received any answers or push 
> back, so I cannot say if I am satisfied since I do not know 
> how they will be disposed.
> 
> In the second case, I personally still dissent but would 
> accept moving to CR if the concrete example given in the 
> thread [1] that shows the XSLT behaviour in dealing with 
> in-scope namespaces. 
> 
> BTW, this behaviour has some important side-effects on the 
> XML query copy semantics that I am not sure the query group 
> really understands.
> 
> Best regards
> Michael
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-query-wg/2001Mar/0349.html
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Arnaud Le Hors [mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 8:55 AM
> > To: Michael Rys
> > Cc: www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org; W3C XML Query WG
> > Subject: Re: XML Infoset Comment Resolution: issue-query-*
> > 
> > 
> > Michael,
> > from reading this thread it isn't absolutely clear to me 
> that we have
> > answered all of your questions to your satisfaction.
> > Could you please state whether you (the query WG) agree on 
> > the XML Core
> > WG moving the XML Infoset spec to CR, or if you want to be 
> recorded as
> > dissenting and, if that's the case, on what specific points.
> > Thank you.
> > -- 
> > Arnaud  Le Hors - Co-chair of XML Core WG
> > 
> 
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 02:59:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:08:00 UTC