Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
* Tim Bray wrote: >I'll rev the draft one more time, but that's about it. As I've said, >this is a trial balloon. There are substantial communities - remarkably >unrepresented here on xml-dev - who have been complaining vociferously >because neither W3C XML Schemas nor RelaxNG shows any sign of addressing >the entity problem, and they claim they really need them, mostly for >this problem of naming characters. If nothing else, +names is a thought >experiment which should clarify these peoples' issues. So far we've >heard a few voices saying "this might be useful" and a few saying "This >is an abomination". So far we haven't really heard very much from the >constituencies whose issues this is designed to address. If this >silence continues, the conclusion will be obvious. People unrepresented on xml-dev are unlikely to speak up in a discussion on xml-dev... Could you point us at some archived mailing list or usenet discussions where people expressed and discussed their need for named character references?
|
