Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(27 Nov 2013 23:59 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
Per Bothner
(28 Nov 2013 03:52 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(28 Nov 2013 04:07 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial John Cowan (28 Nov 2013 04:10 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
Per Bothner
(28 Nov 2013 04:46 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(28 Nov 2013 04:51 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
Per Bothner
(07 Dec 2013 01:24 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(07 Dec 2013 19:24 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
Per Bothner
(08 Dec 2013 08:37 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(08 Dec 2013 17:13 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
Per Bothner
(08 Dec 2013 20:27 UTC)
|
Re: Final comments, mostly editorial
John Cowan
(08 Dec 2013 23:23 UTC)
|
Scripsi: > It was introduced into the XML spec for the sake of SGML compatibility, > yes, not merely a recommendation for those who actually need > compatibility But it is in itself a hardwired rule of XML. Ouch. That should have read: It was introduced into the XML spec for the sake of SGML compatibility, yes. But it is in itself a hardwired rule of XML, not merely a recommendation for those who actually need such compatibility. -- John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Sir, I quite agree with you, but what are we two against so many? --George Bernard Shaw, to a man booing at the opening of _Arms and the Man_