• To: "Rich Salz" <rsalz@d...>, <AndrewWatt2000@a...>
• Subject: RE: Microsoft-phobia and the non-future of XHTML x.x [LONG]
• From: "Gerben Rampaart (Casnet Mechelen)" <Gerben@C...>
• Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 14:42:06 +0100
• Cc: <veillard@r...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0211220808580.952-100000@s...>

There are other ways of showing disagreement then calling someone's opinion
bullshit.

Gerben.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@d...]
Sent: 22 November 2002 14:10
To: AndrewWatt2000@a...
Cc: veillard@r...; xml-dev@l...
Subject: Re:  Microsoft-phobia and the non-future of XHTML x.x
[LONG]


Disagreement is abuse?  Are we reading the same mailing list?

Andrew, someone heavily involved with a topic says your logic is wrong,
your understanding naive.  Perhaps if you want to improve your position,
you'd accept the feedback.
	/r$




-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

• References:
  • Re: Microsoft-phobia and the non-future of XHTML x.x [LONG]
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: Are there any restrictions to XML particle count/size?
• Next by Date: Re: What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
• Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft-phobia and the non-future of XHTML x.x [LONG]
• Next by thread: Re: Microsoft-phobia and the non-future of XHTML x.x [LONG]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread