• To: "Peter Murphy" <peterm@f...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• From: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@e...>
• Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 08:15:02 +0100
• References: <000901c1dc44$8d6f6820$7366ac89@MAR02TT8>

From: "Peter Murphy" <peterm@f...>

> > <conclusion>
> > Get rid of the XML declaration and we can all be a lot more relaxed
about
> > making small, incremental changes to the XML specifications.  Does
anyone
> > agree, or should I get my flame-proof underwear on?
> >
>
> Apart from setting the XML version number, the declaration may describe
the
> character encoding for the document. <snip> They would not like to lose
this ability.
>

Of course, the encoding declaration is very useful and I certainly wouldn't
argue for its removal.  I should have been more precise - its the version
attribute that's the source of the problem, not the XML declaration itself.

~Rob

• References:
  • RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Peter Murphy" <peterm@f...>

• Prev by Date: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by Date: Insert HTML Page into XML CDATA Tag
• Previous by thread: RE: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread