• From: Edd Dumbill <edd@u...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 23:18:14 +0100

On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 05:49:50PM -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> Why is this list getting so hyper-sensitive about any press that suggests
> XML isn't perfect?

I'll gladly entertain notions that XML isn't perfect, but I won't do so
on the basis of an obivously erroneous (not just controversial) article.

-- Edd

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: MoreStupidXMLArticles))
    • From: "Michael F. Maddox" <mmaddox@h...>
  • Re: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More Stupid XMLArticles))
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
• Next by Date: Re: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
• Previous by thread: Re: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
• Next by thread: Re: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArticles))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread