Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Stand up at a bar and complain about the
> topic of conversation. Then they can talk
> about that for a few weeks.
That's why I said I was hoping I was not starting an endless thread ;-)
>
> XML is done. Questions about XML applications
> are redirected to lists dedicated to the
> applications.
Would you say that fundamental physic is done because we have chimists
and know how to produce plastics and microprocessors?
It's not because people are developing applications that it's no use to
work on the fundamentals.
I am convinced that there are still lots of things to learn and improve
in the core mechanisms of XML and that we need a place (xml-dev or any
other) to discuss this.
> Business cases and how to
> select an architecture are related to the
> philosophy for making a choice.
>
> Can't leave it to the W3C. They don't have one.
I don't feel qualified (nor very interested) by these debates. Do they
need to be carried on the same list?
Eric
>
> len
--
See you in Barcelona.
http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/schedule.asp
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
