• From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@j...>
• To: "David Megginson" <david@m...>, "XML-DEV" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 08:32:58 +0800

> >But I didn't suggest that at all (sorry for any confusion) -- I merely
> >suggested that the Namespace-qualified name itself is just a
> >signifier.  The signified is something and somewhere else.  I'm fairly 
> >certain that we agree on this point.

see .sig :-)

James
--
James Tauber / jtauber@j... / www.jtauber.com
Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com,  www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net
<pipe>Ceci n'est pas une pipe</pipe>




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:
  • Re: Another look at namespaces
    • From: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w...>
  • Signifiers/Namespaces (was Re: Another look at namespaces)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: W3C and 'small vendors'.
• Next by Date: should FOP require JDK1.2.x?
• Previous by thread: Signifiers/Namespaces (was Re: Another look at namespaces)
• Next by thread: RE: Another look at namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread