[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 06:14:02 -0800 Jamie Clark <jamie.clark@o...> wrote: > Personal opinions here - and no relation to my namesake in Thailand. > > Pete, what more is required? Isn't it already written up? As a true > subset, it requires nothing from the XML standard itself How about a parser/something to confirm that your instance *is* uxml? Drifting into expanding the definition by aim or lack of thought could be a problem if the recipient has process tools expecting uxml? -- regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |

Cart



