OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: FW: XML Spec: Removal of Reservation of "xml" from Names in Errata to 5th Edition

Here is Liam's final response to my questions.


Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC

On 8/20/14, 12:49 PM, "Liam R E Quin" <liam@w3.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:42:56 -0500
>Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com> wrote:
>> As far as I can tell the DITA standard itself does not specify use of
>> 1.1. So does that mean we can simply ignore XML 1.1 on this issue and
>> XML 1.0 as definitive? I haven't really paid attention to the
>> of XML 1.1 vs. 1.0. DITA definitely does not *require* the use of XML
>XML 1.0 5th edition replaces XML 1.1 for most practical purposes.
>Differences are the use of Unicode NEL as whitespace (not recommended for
>interchange outside a mainframe environment though) and the C0 control
>characters that are permitted if escaped in 1.1 and not allowed at all in
>1.0 (but they are meaningless and are included only for compatibility).
>> Xerces definitely does not report the use of names starting with "xml"
>> (and never has as far as I know since I've been using these tag names
>> since at least 2007).
>Most don't, I've envountered a couple of parsers that reject them.
>> So it sounds like the errata to XML 1.0 5th Edition are sufficient to
>> argue correctness of the current DITA 1.3 design with names starting
>> "xml".
>Yes, I think so.
>Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
>Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]