• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 22:32:09 +1000
• References: <200210211106.HAA24448@m...>

> Eric van der Vlist scripsit:
> 
> > But then, they'll have derogated from being conservative in what they
> > send...

I guess the Ethopians want to be conservative: to use an international standard
(Unicode 3.2) rather than some homemade encodings!

I think there is middle approach between John Cowan's "It is a question of justice"
approach and Michael Kay's "This is of marginal value compared to the costs" which
I certainly understand. That is for XML 1.1 to be undistruptive and slow enough 
that it can infiltrate slowly: I have followed XML 1.1 very closely, and I think it
is now undisruptive (and, in the single area that it disrupts, it is an improvement)
and can be introduced slowly.

There is no XML 2.0 project in the works: I guess the fastest one could happen
would be 2 years minimum.  So this clears up one area of value to some.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Next by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Previous by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread