> o Namespaces
Because the development of XML-related standards isn't open
(you gotta pay $$$$ to play), nobody's likely to listen to your
idea, which is essentially that of the (current - 1)th namespace draft.
> o Expanded Names
>
> The issue of expanded names reminds me a great deal of C++ name mangling.
> The C++ committee chose not to standardize mangled names. Consequently, it
> is impossible to link libraries compiled by different libraries.
That was intentional, since different compilers use different callling
conventions anyhow.
> As an aside, the stylesheet processor might want to match by prefix, which
> would insulate documents from changes in the namespace ID, which might
> change to reflect DTD version changes.
Maybe so.
> www.w3c.org is starting to look like Schema-of-the-Month Club.
The stuff they're publishing is Notes, which means "neat ideas by
members; W3C doesn't endorse them in any way."
> I am
> confused about where things are going.
So say we all (except perhaps people who are constrained by W3C
confidentiality from saying anything).
-- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)