• To: 'Dare Obasanjo' <dareo@m...>, Liam Quin <liam@w...>
• Subject: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 20 04 weblog items?)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:58:37 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Yes.  But we do have a lot of experience at this point
that we didn't have when we started SGML On The Web. 
I can't defend the SGML compatibility requirements 
at this point.  Others might be able to do that.  

len

From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@m...]

> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@i...] 
 
> Tim Bray made an excellent point in his closing keynote when 
> he compared it to AWT and Swing:  if the tech needs 
> improving, just do it.  Have the fortitude to step up to the task.

Of course, it depends on your definition of "needs improving". Every
technology needs improving. The question is whether the cost of
"improvement" is worth the benefit.  

• Prev by Date: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• Next by Date: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• Previous by thread: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 20 04 weblog items?)
• Next by thread: Simplify XML Now? (Was RE: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread