On ven, 2005-07-15 at 00:50 +0900, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:
> > I can see both sides of this debate.
>
> So do I. If the camp trying to standardize PIs is not the majority
> of the RELAX NG community, I do not think that PIs will take off.
>
> Here is my understanding of the current status. Please let me know
> if I misinterprets somebody.
>
> For schema-associating PIs
> Jirka Kosek
> Robin Berjon
> George Cristian Bina
+1
As I have already mentioned I do think that PI have been created exactly
for this type of ad-hoc (semi standard if you prefer) usages.
I don't see how defining such a PI would harm anyone even if it was used
only by 0.001% of the RNG users.
Eric
> Against schema-associating PIs
> B. Tommie Usdin
> Bob Foster
> Sean McGrath
>
> Neutral
> Murata
> Norm Walsh
>
> Cheers,
> Makoto
--
Carnet web :
http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog?t=category&a=Fran%C3%A7ais
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "rng-users" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
