• From: "Don Park" <donpark@q...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:30:52 -0700

> 2. Level-three-browser compatibility is probably too important to drop
>    altogether -- PIs are unlikely to show up in specs that might be
>    used on HTML pages (Namespaces, RDF, Stylesheet linking, XHTML).

Level-three-browsers can be supported by filtering out PI from the
server-side if the client can not handle PI.  Real world problems like
legacy browser incompatibility are best solved with real world solutions.

Best,

Don



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...)

• References:
  • What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
    • From: "Don Park" <donpark@q...>
  • re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• Prev by Date: archetype refinement and architectural forms
• Next by Date: Re: XLink: behavior must go!
• Previous by thread: re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
• Next by thread: Re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread