• To: "'Hunsberger, Peter'" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>
• Subject: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:28:24 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Before we rationalize the list, let's get the first list.

I use DTDs too but I'm more interested to know if there is a
quick consensus of the developer's perceptions (meaning the 
problem(s) are obvious to the trained observer, and therefore, 
the coupler is strong).

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Hunsberger, Peter [mailto:Peter.Hunsberger@S...]

Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...> writes:

>    1) DTDs
>    2) other legacy cruft
>    3) DTDs
>    4) more legacy cruft you always forget is there
>    5) DTDs
> 
Since I don't have to write any tools to actually support DTDs they
actually sort of, almost, help me more than they hinder.  Maybe Len
needs to divide the question between two (more?) camps: 1) XML users, 2)
XML tool builders?

• Prev by Date: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Next by Date: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Previous by thread: Re: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Next by thread: RE: Partyin' like it's 1999
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread