• From: len bullard <cbullard@h...>
• To: Paul Prescod <papresco@t...>
• Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 22:13:30 -0600

Paul Prescod wrote:
> 
> My argument for keeping XML a subset of SGML goes like this

[snip]

> The language that we use to encode humanity's knowledge should be a true
> standard and not merely a "recommendation." That means that it should
> be built upon our democratic institutions and not vendor consortiums.

Well said, Paul.

I suggest also, if we play this long enough, there 
won't be significant differences between SGML and XML 
*in common practice*.  That's a goal that's easy to agree on but
takes many hands at the table to achieve.

First, demonstrably useful software.  Version 1.0.

len bullard

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Must XML be SGML compatible? (Was: An incompatible CData idea)
    • From: Jarle Stabell <jarle.stabell@d...>
  • Re: Must XML be SGML compatible? (Was: An incompatible CData idea)
    • From: Paul Prescod <papresco@t...>

• Prev by Date: Hey, XML on the Web, check it out
• Next by Date: Re: Hey, XML on the Web, check it out
• Previous by thread: Re: Must XML be SGML compatible? (Was: An incompatible CData idea)
• Next by thread: Re: Must XML be SGML compatible? (Was: An incompatible CData idea)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread