• From: "Don Park" <donpark@q...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 17:29:00 -0700

> I do not speak for W3C, but I can say with little fear of contradiction
> that consensus on this issue does not yet exist.  Some people, as a matter
> of principle, regard PIs as problematic second-class syntax and would like
> simply to cease using them.  Others see them as a perfectly respectable
> out-of-band signaling mechanism.  Each time the idea of using PIs for
> some purpose has been proposed, lengthy and intense debate has ensued.

Tim,

Thanks for clearing that up.  Do you what the folks who "regard PIs as
problematic second-class syntax" recommend for first-class out-of-band
signaling mechanism?  I wouldn't mind giving up PI if there was an
alternative.

Best,

Don Park
Docuverse



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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Parsing content with SAX API
• Next by Date: Re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
• 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