• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptions for XML
• From: "bryan" <bry@i...>
• Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:53:51 +0200
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <001101c222a5$b8dbb570$2001a8c0@bryans>

I said
>>> Surely that is a matter of traditions. Programming Language
>>> is generalluy understood not to be part of the acronym for 
>>> any programming language

and then Michael said
>>Except, of course, APL, BCPL, CPL, and no doubt a few others.
And then I said
>I think it's an indicator of the rule
>however if the primary exceptions turn out to be DSLs.. 

and then I thought, hmm does my argument turn to [expletive deleted] if one considers
COBOL and PERL?
Well, maybe although since neither has PROGRAMMING in the expanded set
of the acronym I figure I still have a leg to stand on. Not hop on. But
stand.

• References:
  • RE: Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptions for XML
    • From: "bryan" <bry@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XQuery and DTD/Schema?
• Next by Date: RE: XQuery and DTD/Schema?
• Previous by thread: RE: Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptions for XML
• Next by thread: Re: Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptionsfor XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread