On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 23:57 -0400, Christopher R. Maden wrote:
> Hardly anyone used archforms in SGML,
I'm not sure I share that perspective.
Did you know that SoftQuad Author/Editor and SoftQuad Panorama both had
some archform support?
I do think it's unfortunate arch forms were lost.
> I suspect the answer is that the loss of namespaces in MicroXML means
> that a facility is needed to replace them... but why not
> better-designed namespaces? One can conceive of namespace
> declarations that are not as atrocious as W3C namespaces, but which
> are mutually compatible with them (in fact, best practices uses of W3C
> namespaces are not, ultimately, so bad).
You need to be more concrete in your proposal I think :-)
Liam
--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
