• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:09:07 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <p06010202bc3414d0f2c8@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <20030420212424.77D5824AEB6@m...> <p0601020bbc330bbad09a@[192.168.254.4]> <1074680678.400e53666dcf0@82.195.128.192> <p06010202bc3414d0f2c8@[192.168.254.4]>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit:

> No, I don't plan to support XML 1.1, certainly not in XOM 1.0 and 
> beyond that not unless someone asks for it and demonstrates a real 
> need. This is discussed in the XOM FAQ at 
> http://www.cafeconleche.org/XOM/faq.xhtml#d0e183

Your more moderate remarks in "Fifty Ways To Lose Your XML Virginity"
have my full support, but I really do resent the word "abomination".
Perhaps I shall have to issue a rogue patch for XOM....

-- 
John Cowan       http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        <jcowan@r...>
        You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
        You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
                Clear all so!  `Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Sweet nostalgia
• Next by Date: RE: Postel's law, exceptions
• Previous by thread: browser versus rich client
• Next by thread: Re: [XOM-interest] Re: Unicode forms for internal storage
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread