• From: Tom Bradford <bradford@d...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:50:27 -0700

Tim Bray wrote:
> Markup isn't *about* anything.  Namespaces aren't
> *about* anything.  They are labels.  They provide part
> of the infrastructure you need to build edifices of
> schemaware and displayware and ebizware and so on.

Everything is *about* something else, including markup and namespaces. 
If something wasn't about something else, it would have no reason to
exist.  Markup and namespaces are *about* labeling things, but so are
many other formats, so XML has to be *about* something more than that in
order to justify its existence.  What it's about is becoming more lost
in the sh*t pile as time passes.  

If it wasn't about anything do you think you would have put so much time
into it?

-- 
Tom Bradford  The dbXML Group, L.L.C.  http://www.dbxmlgroup.com/
Desktop, Laptop, Settop, Palmtop.  Can your XML database do that?

• References:
  • RE: An open plea to the W3C (was Re: XInclude vs SAX vs
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: RE: How to specify a Processing Instruction? (better: how to controlencoding on saving)
• Next by Date: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Previous by thread: RE: An open plea to the W3C (was Re: XInclude vs SAX vs
• Next by thread: RE: An open plea to the W3C (was Re: XInclude vs SAX vs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread