• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: James Robertson <jamesr@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:23:18 -0600

Not at all, James.  His arguments are vacuous.  
He cites no examples and offers no proof other 
than that other initiatives have failed.  He 
fails to cite the successes or offer any 
contrasts as to why they may have succeeded.
He has a vested interest in doing this:  he 
offers FUD and if you care to contract with 
him, he will provide his evidence and advice.

I'd say that about covers what bears do. 

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: James Robertson [mailto:jamesr@s...]

Len,

I don't want to be rude, but: you seem to be
attacking the man, not the argument.

That you need to do this suggests to me that
his arguments have too much validity for your
comfort.

• Prev by Date: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Next by Date: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Previous by thread: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Next by thread: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread