- From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 10:22:35 +0100
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- CC: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com, xmlp-comments <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Larry Masinter wrote: > It sounds to me that, rather than marking this issue "closed", it > should be marked as an issue with the HTTP binding rather than > with the main spec. That is, the issue remains but the locus of > resolution has changed. > I'd propose that rather than leave issue 4 open (whose focus was the action to take on receipt of messages including DTDs and PIs) we create a new issue whose sole focus is to clarify whether XML declarations are allowed/required in serialisations of the message. Would this be satisfactory ? Regards, Marc. > >> That binding >>will, presumably, continue to use XML 1.0 serialization of the message >>infoset, and we should indeed be clear on whether the XML declaration is >>allowed/required there. >> >> -- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com> XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 05:24:12 UTC