• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:29:27 -0400
• In-reply-to: <1f0.dcfb41d.2c518848@a...>
• References: <1f0.dcfb41d.2c518848@a...>
• User-agent: Opera7.03/Win32 M2 build 2670

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:06:48 EDT, <AndrewWatt2000@a...> wrote:


> As I watch the premeditated complexification at the W3C I am reminded of 
> the deep insight contained in the aphorism, "Just because you are 
> paranoid doesn't mean that they are not out to get you.".
>
> Binary XML, viewed in that context, is only a further step in an already 
> active, if highly undesirable, process at W3C.
>
> Andrew Watt
> P.S. You did mean it when you invited list members to flame away? :)

That's Permathread 3 "The W3C is Evil / No, it's the nature of committees 
to do that kind of stuff".  I'm asking for flames on Permathread 2, "Binary 
XML is evil / No, it's needed for industrial-strength XML". :-)

• References:
  • Re: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...

• Prev by Date: Re: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• Next by Date: Re: OT: data url scheme
• Previous by thread: Re: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• Next by thread: RE: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread