• From: Steven Rowe <sarowe@t...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 01:09:04 -0400

Is it not ironic that Common XML, an attempt to increase interoperability,
excludes PIs, which are likely to be the mechanism which will be proposed
to express document feature requirements, another attempt to increase
interoperability.

Steve Rowe
MNIS-TextWise Labs

"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:

> I posted a bit about Common XML in the Parser Behaviour (serious) thread
> yesterday, but at the time it was bits and pieces in various postings.
>
> There's a complete (though rough and unpolished) draft up at:
> http://www.simonstl.com/articles/cxmlspec.txt


***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• Follow-Ups:
  • Common XML (was Re: Document Feature Requirements)
    • From: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@g...>
  • Re: Document Feature Requirements [was: Common XML ...]
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Document Feature Requirements [was: Common XML ...]
    • From: "Michael Champion" <Mike.Champion@s...>

• References:
  • Common XML in one piece
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Feature Manifest (Was:RE: Parser Behaviour (serious))
• Next by Date: Re: NEWBIE -> RE: Parser Behaviour (serious)
• Previous by thread: Common XML in one piece
• Next by thread: Re: Document Feature Requirements [was: Common XML ...]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread