- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:09:39 -0700
- To: "Erik Wilde" <net.dret@dret.net>, <www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org>
The Working Group agrees with you. In the next publication, we'll note [include history] and [language] as exceptions to infoset "sameness" in each of the examples in Appendix C. > -----Original Message----- > From: www-xml-xinclude-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xml-xinclude- > comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Erik Wilde > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 1:09 AM > To: www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org > Subject: minor remark regarding appendix c > > > > > > hello. > > in the xinclude cr document, appendix c uses the phrase "The infoset > resulting from resolving inclusions on this document is the same as that > of the following document" for examples 1 through 4. as i understand it, > the [language] property is optional, but the [include history] property > is mandatory. so, technically speaking, the infoset of the serialization > is not the (exact) same as that of the resolved inclusion. at least > that's what i think... > > cheers, > > erik wilde - tel:+41-1-6325132 - fax:+41-1-6321035 > mailto:net.dret@dret.net - http://dret.net/netdret > computer engineering and networks laboratory (tik) > swiss federal institute of technology, zurich (ethz) > >
Received on Monday, 12 July 2004 18:09:50 UTC