Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
[Richard Tobin] > >I see that erratum E38 to the XML 1.0 Rec removed the prescription that it > >is an error to use the wrong version number in the XML declaration. > > But it also replaced the VersionNum production with one requiring 1.0. > Richard, would you clarify this point? I saw that the production required "1.0", but withou the requirement to produce an error, my own interpretation would be that a processor could accept, say, "1.1" and proceed without an error. Was the idea that the production would be so definitive that obviously a well-formedness error should be produced? > It is because the Core WG realised that that erratum was over-hastily > accepted that we are soliciting opinions here. > And I thank you all for that. The rationale for the change was said to be XML 1.1, and personally I think it should not have been published until 1.1 was published - they should have been coordinated. What if 1.1 never happens in the anticipated form? What of the change to 1.0 then? Cheers, Tom P
|
