• From: "Borden, Jonathan" <jborden@m...>
• To: "XML Developers' List" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 23:07:59 -0500

We should conclude that simple is good.

Efforts like the 'annotated XML spec' are a big help. In most specs a few
well chosen examples greatly add to formalisms.

Questions and controversies are bound to happen, especially with new
technology.

The proof will not be the existence of XML parsers, rather applications
which are adopted by the general public (e.g. html). specs alone can't take
us there.


> >
> >But is anyone here trying to _implement_ Java?  Lots of folks here are
> >indeed trying to _implement_ XML 1.0 (parsers and SAX), XLink
> and XPointer,
> >Namespaces, XSL, etc.  It's not like we're only trying to _use_
> them, as is
> >the case with Java (or SQL, another example that's been bounced
> around.)
>
> Most of them seem to be succeeding.  What should we conclude? -Tim
>

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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:
  • Re: What Clean Specs Achieve
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: A critique of XML-RPC
• Next by Date: Re: CORBA's not boring yet. / XML in an OS?
• Previous by thread: Re: What Clean Specs Achieve
• Next by thread: Re: What Clean Specs Achieve
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread