• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• To: connolly@w...
• Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:36:04 +0100 (BST)

> We have documented this since Feb '98, when XML 1.0 became
> a recommendation despite the lack of namespace support:
> 	-- http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-webarch-extlang-19980210#Evolving

One would have assumed though that a later REC would supersede any
comments in an early NOTE. The description of namespace that you quote
there may have been the intention at the time (and clearly is what you
wish namespaces had become) but it is nothing like the concept of
namespace defined in the namespace rec.


David

***************************************************************************
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:
  • Re: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
    • From: John Robert Gardner <jrgardn@e...>
  • Re: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• References:
  • Irony heaped on irony
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Irony heaped on irony
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
    • From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w...>

• Prev by Date: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
• Next by Date: Re: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
• Previous by thread: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
• Next by thread: Re: Toward the self-describing web [was: Irony heaped on irony]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread