• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>,"'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath 1.5? )
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 08:00:10 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B423@HQ5>

At 09:53 AM 5/9/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>I think Simon is taking a conservative view of what XML is,
>and that is why one repeats the question from time to time,
>what is Core.  Some say XML 1.0, others say XML 1.0
>plus namespaces, some say XML 1.0 plus
>(name a subset of all the specs written for processing
>XML in one context or another).

Currently, I would say that you can be compliant to XML 1.0, XML 1.0 plus 
namespace, or XML 1.0 plus namespaces and schema, but there is no one thing 
called XML, and there is no official statement whether these are all now 
conformance levels of XML, or perhaps one or more of these has been superceded.

Would you want the W3C to make an official statement about this?

Jonathan

• References:
  • RE: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath 1.5? )
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath1.5? )
• Next by Date: RE: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath 1.5? )
• Previous by thread: RE: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath 1.5? )
• Next by thread: RE: RE: working with text (was RE: XPath 1.5? )
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread