- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 20:04:54 -0700
- To: db@argon.Eng.Sun.COM (David Brownell), xml-names-issues@w3.org
At 12:49 AM 8/16/98 -0700, David Brownell wrote: >The "motivation" (why not clearly defined "goals"?) in the XML >namespace draft defines combining "markup from multiple independent >sources" as needing namespace collision avoidance mechanisms. The >XML specification defines markup (2.4, first para) as including >entity references, DTDs, and PIs ... but the XML namespace draft >neither addresses such markup, nor justifies why that markup should >be unprotected. I am in the progress of doing a (with luck nearly final) revision of the namespace draft. I just finished reading this, and David has a point, but I tried a couple of different alternate wordings and they got seroiusly in the way of the flow. The fact of the matter is that for now, we're just doing elements and attributes; I don't think the explanation of this choice adds much value to the spec. My co-editors or the XML IG may choose to disagree. -Tim
Received on Thursday, 10 September 1998 23:04:10 UTC