I can agree with you but not with the proposed text, which may imply that every kind of semantics (even the one already existing in the standards) could be expressed through this mechanism (which is frightening perspective, isn'it ?)<br>
<br>I would keep the sentence saying that this mechanism is only for what is out of reach of the current standards<br><br>Mohamed<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 5:56 AM, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp">eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">> "A smart tag shall represent extra-standard semantics using the two<br>
> elements specified in this clause."<br>
<br>
</div>I now think that we should say nothing about semantics here, since<br>
we are talking about semantics not standardized in 29500.<br>
<br>
How about:<br>
<br>
An XML element can be constructed using the two elements specified in<br>
this subclause.<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<font color="#888888">Makoto<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Innovimax SARL<br>Consulting, Training & XML Development<br>9, impasse des Orteaux<br>75020 Paris<br>Tel : +33 9 52 475787<br>Fax : +33 1 4356 1746<br><a href="http://www.innovimax.fr">http://www.innovimax.fr</a><br>
RCS Paris 488.018.631<br>SARL au capital de 10.000 €<br>