Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Murray Maloney wrote: > > Tim, I trust that the namespace spec makes perfect sense to you. > But it does not make sense to me and many others. Take a step > back and look/listen again. I sense that you are so close to it > that you just don't see the monstrous chasms that others do. ...> > From my point of view, namespaces is a "ramshackle compromise". > I give you credit for appreciating that many/most of us aren't stupid. > Is the problem here the content of the namespace spec or the way it is written? It seems to me that people who feel that the spec is a compromise, or wish the spec specified something different, are unhappy. If you really don't understand the spec, how can you claim it is a ramshackle compromise? I suspect that you understand it and don't like it. The problem doesn't appear to be the way the spec is written and a professional writer won't solve that problem. Jonathan Borden http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
