• To: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
• Subject: Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 09:54:39 -0800
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20030222193255.00b1ade0@m...>
• References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030222193255.00b1ade0@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

Sean McGrath wrote:
> [Tim Bray]
>  >It's OK to define a custom language for your own purposes, but it's 
> not OK at all to use the term "XML" in
>  >describing it; 
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Basically every XML editor/ETL/database loader I have ever come across 
> is non-conformant to
> the XML 1.0 specification in some way or other.
> 
> The world is full of "xml parsers" that only support bits of XML 1.0. 

Etc... there's a word for these situations: "bugs".  Bugs are a fact of 
life and we fix them and deal with them.  When someone writes a 
specification for a potentially-very-important software library and 
writes the bug into the definition, that's a different level of 
seriousness. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Next by thread: Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread