• To: "'elharo@m...'" <elharo@m...>
• Subject: InkML
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 08:32:51 -0500
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>

Good call, Elliotte, on the con Leche review of the 
InkML first draft. 

Various consortia have announced that they want to 
work with each other to get maximum interoperability 
of their products.   We have at least four markup 
languages that have XML productions for coordinate 
markup, and they are all different.  While I can 
understand differences in the implementation of 
the object models, I question the need for variant 
dialects for xyz coordinate systems. If such a need 
is real, we should understand it now.

And we should begin to explore sharing the abstract object 
models as well where feasible.

len

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: InkML
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: InkML
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Next by Date: RE: Are we ready for the namespace ID registry, yet? (was: RelaxNG question)
• Previous by thread: RE: Schema validators
• Next by thread: Re: InkML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread