- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:03:04 -0600
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 5:56 PM > To: Champion, Mike > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org > Subject: RE: Problem with resolution of Issue 221 > > > * Finally, if the rationale is to allow arbitrary user XML in the > body, but then it's somewhere between difficult and impossible > anyway. Ahh, that's pretty much the clincher for me. > > In short, even a simple capability of carrying PI's introduces > some complexity into the specifications, into applications and > APIs, and into conformance testing. Thanks, that was exactly what I was looking for. > Having said that, I would also like to point out that the workgroup > has reached the point that most successful software projects reach, > where having a stable design and shipping a specification begins to > grow in importance relative to making every design decision perfectly. Right. I was just hoping there was a better rationale, and there does seem to be. OK, I'm comfortable with forbidding them entirely, even if a plausible case can be made in the other direction.
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2002 18:03:41 UTC