• To: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
• Subject: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:02:36 -0600
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l... '" <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <84A17744-4621-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F139@h...> <84A17744-4621-11D8-8ADE-000A95CCC59E@x...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007

Michael Champion wrote:
> ...[awaiting 
> shrieks from the people who shot down XML 1.1]...

I see a November 2003 Candidate Recommendation for XML 1.1. I haven't 
checked it for bullet holes, but it seems healthy enough to an outsider. 
What do you mean?

Bob Foster
http://xmlbuddy.com/

• References:
  • RE: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: Postel's law, exceptions
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by Date: Re: Postel's "Law": A question for liberal parsers
• Previous by thread: Re: Postel's law, exceptions
• Next by thread: RE: Postel's law, exceptions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread