• From: Michael Beddow <mbnospam@m...>
• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:54:16 +0100

Even to conceive of the phrase "backwards-compatible evolution"
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlp-reqs/ R702) requires a rare blend of
stupidity and ignorance. That it can pass many pairs of eyes and end
up in a Working Draft for public scrutiny beggars belief. Still, it's
not hard to see what the evolutionary consequences of such
misadaptation will be.

W3 was a Great Idea. XML was an Even Better One.  Neither is now safe
in the hands of what the W3C has become.

But it doesn't really matter. The bandwagon may sink in the mud, but
those who are not just along for the ride (and the grant funding) will
leave it behind and keep heading where they need to go.

Michael
------------------------------------------
Michael Beddow
http://www.mbeddow.net/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Web Philosophy
    • From: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@m...>
  • RE: Web Philosophy
    • From: Danny Ayers <danny@p...>

• References:
  • RE: Web Philosophy
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Announcing Developmentor's XML Tutorial
• Next by Date: Re: Web Philosophy
• Previous by thread: RE: Web Philosophy
• Next by thread: Re: Web Philosophy
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread