Re: some xmlns:atom tomfoolery

On 29/5/05 7:09 AM, "John Panzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>... >> >> >> > Or perhaps: > > ... > > > :^) > >> hmmm... seriously though, th

Re: atom, xslt processors (Re: atom:type, xsl:output)

Henri Sivonen, > A conforming xml-stylesheet processor will only act on the PI if it > appears in the prolog. For this reason, it would be possible to allow > xml-stylesheet PIs in atom:content and spec that they are part of the > content document, so that an XML document with the PI in its pr

Re: atom, xslt processors (Re: atom:type, xsl:output)

Aristotle, > > (2) RSS and Atom documents are now processed with > > PIs, and there is no way to formally specify > > when those instructions should be executed (except for specific > > instances that don't matter here). So any > > nodes, and PI nodes in general, must be assumed to be linked t

Re: atom:type, xsl:output

Henri Sivonen, > > MSIE conditional comments. See other person's reply. > > I thought they were for text/html tag soup only. Anyway, I think Atom > should not try to enable such bogosity in XML. I don't think Atom should take a position if it doesn't have to. > > And yes: I know that Atom is