• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: xml-dev@x...
• Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 08:53:58 -0700

>  In recognition of this fact, official erratum E73 (at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-19980210-errata#E73) removes these productions
> from XML 1.0 altogether.  ...
> 
> ... There is no validity constraint prescribing it.

Although it's certainly confusing that there WAS a validity
constraint for a while, and in fact that was the official
W3C story given to its members for over a year before it
was finally published as an erratum earlier this year.

I hope I'm not the only one who finds the W3C backtracking
to be a potential concern, with respect to stability of
the specifications on which we're building.

In effect, there was a VC for about 18 months, up to about
one month ago when E73 became public.

- Dave

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes
    • From: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@g...>

• References:
  • Re: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Schema: regular expression challenge
• Next by Date: parsing XML using regular expressions
• Previous by thread: Re: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes
• Next by thread: Re: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread