• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensible?
• From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>
• Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 10:32:01 +0200
• In-reply-to: <43B6F8AB-CE7F-11D7-80FF-000393BB8814@s...>

[please excuse what may be a duplicate post, but the list-serve appears 
to be dropping half of my posts and messages to the admin just 
bounce...]


On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 09:20 Europe/Berlin, james anderson wrote:

>
> On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 20:17 Europe/Berlin, Bullard, Claude L 
> (Len) wrote:
>
>> I realize that but may not be getting exactly what you
>> are saying.
>
> perhaps it would help, if i express my concern in terms which are 
> foremost in your mind at the moment.
>
> i suggest that, when you decide to warrant a product, you would
[not]
> do so on the basis of the name of the programming language in which it 
> is implemented.
>

• References:
  • Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensible?
    • From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensible?
• Next by Date: thinking about "namespace pedantry"
• Previous by thread: Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensible?
• Next by thread: RE: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensible?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread