Your attention to detail is much appreciated!
On Mon, 07 May 2007 17:05:59 +0200, Innovimax SARL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Implementations should support some version of XML. If they don't
support some version of XML responseXML must always be null. [XML]
[XMLNS]
]]
Does it mean a conformant implementation could support NO version of XML?
Yes, in theory.
The version implied by the text is the version of XML. So "1.0" and
"1.1". There must be a reference to XML 1.1 specification in that
respect
Argh, really? Having two references for XML seems already too much to me
:-) I think the current text and references are good. Apart from Opera I'm
not sure any user agent actually supports XML 1.1 so normatively
referencing it doesn't like a good idea to me. The language used in the
specification is backed up by the references which say XML 1.0 and
Namespaces for XML 1.0.
What is not clear is about support XML 1.0 or XML 1.0 with Namespaces
: what is the expected behavior if the filename send is
[[
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<::/>
]]
which is a valid XML 1.0 file but not a valid XML 1.0 with Namespaces ?
Please clarify the behaviour regarding this
This is clear in the specification. It requires files to be namespace
well-formed.
== 1.2.2. Terminology ==
[[
There is a case-insensitive match of strings a and b if after
lowercasing both strings (by mapping A-Z to a-z) they are identical.
]]
I would prefer to read
[[
There is a case-insensitive match of strings s1 and s2 if after
upercasing both strings (by mapping a-z to A-Z) they are identical.
]]
s1 and s2 because there is less confusion with letter a and b
uppercasing because it is used latter in the spec for method
Fair enough, done.
==References==
[[
[RFC2617]
HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication, ...
]]
should be
[[
[RFC2617]
HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication, P.
Hallam-Baker, J. Hostetler, S. Lawrence, P. Leach, A. Luotonen, L.
Stewart, editors. IETF,
June 1999
]]
Indeed! Fixed.
Warning for next step : Reference to "Window Object" and "Document
Object Model (DOM) Level 3 Events Specification" are Working Draft
Well, I think we can go to Candidate Recommendation and sit there until
everything reaches that level, much like SVG Tiny 1.2 did.
==Typo==
s/reqeust/request/
s/resonse/response/
Fixed!
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
