Proposed fix for DR 10-0016 ("MCE: Core Concepts")

Jesper Lund Stocholm jesper.stocholm at
Thu Jul 1 09:20:42 CEST 2010

Hi all,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Brown [mailto:alexb at]
> Sent: 1. juli 2010 08:38
> To: Chris Rae; e-SC34-WG4 at
> Cc: Jesper Lund Stocholm
> Subject: RE: Proposed fix for DR 10-0016 ("MCE: Core Concepts")

> Removing subsumption has the advantage of allowing us to erase a lot
> this cruft and will result in a smaller text.
> The way I see it, alternative content is markup for which "all bets
> off" anyway (except that the MCE Namespace is not used in content). I
> think subsumption is conceptually and technically problematic, and
> doesn't actually help implementers if (on top of that) it is optional
> anyway.
> Or do any experts think "subsumption" is useful concept?

I think it makes a lot of sense to tighten up the text and make it more
clear. I completely agree with you that when using MCE, "all bets are
off". The problem with subsumption is that is kind of indicates that it
makes stuff "a little bit easier". However, I seriously question that -
not only from a point of view of understanding the concept itself - but
also when implementing explicit support for subsumed/ing namespaces.

Med venlig hilsen / Best regards

Jesper Lund Stocholm

CIBER Danmark A/S
Mobil: +45 3094 5570
Email: jesper.stocholm at

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list