• From: "joubin" <joubin@i...>
• To: "John Tigue" <john.tigue@t...>, "xml-dev" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:35:13 -0400

Right you are.  Nasty looking thing, isn't it?


>Wouldn't that be:
>
><?xml?>
>  <?version?>1.0<?/version?>
>
><methodCall>
>   </asynchronous>
>   <methodName>xmlbased.cgi.named.foo<methodName>
>     // .. etc.
></methodCall>
>
>
>or are pseudo-attibutes ok?
>
>
>/John
>
>--
>John Tigue
>john.tigue@t...
>http://www.tigue.com



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...)

• Prev by Date: Re: Attributes vs. text content
• Next by Date: Re: Attributes vs. text content (Was Re: RFC: Attributes and XML-RPC)
• Previous by thread: RE: Attributes vs. text content
• Next by thread: Elements cannot be described more than once in DTD, right ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread