• From: "Clark C. Evans" <clark.evans@m...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:15:57 -0500 (EST)

I guess the title says it all.  

It just seems that two domains, log files and continuous 
broadcasts are left out in the cold with this seemingly
arbitrary choice.  So, I'm looking for answers *other*
than the following:
  
  0. Beacuse the spec says so.

  1. To stay compatible with SGML, so XML documents
     can be used in SGML processors.

  3. Beacuse XML is syntax for *documents* ; it was
     never intended to be a general *information* syntax.

Thanks!

Clark

P.S. Yes, I'm familar with the Document Fragment NOTE, this
is exactly why I'm asking the question.  


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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe 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:
  • Bizarre XLinks (was Re: Namespace proposal)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Bizarre XLinks (was Re: Namespace proposal)
• Next by Date: Re: What is the reasoning why a well-formed XML text cannot have multiple top level elements?
• Previous by thread: Bizarre XLinks (was Re: Namespace proposal)
• Next by thread: Re: Bizarre XLinks (was Re: Namespace proposal)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread