• To: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>
• Subject: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>
• Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:04:10 -0800
• Cc: Jeff Rafter <lists@j...>, Toni Uusitalo <toni.uusitalo@p...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20050204214937.GA31170@t...>
• References: <6.0.0.22.0.20050204222038.02251d70@p...> <20050204204803.GA31024@t...> <4203E19D.2030607@j...> <20050204214937.GA31170@t...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Macintosh/20041206)

Amelia A Lewis wrote:

> Almost all of this has to do with authoring, for folks who actually don't
> mind (or even like, frightening as that may be) pointy brackets and
> ampersands.  If you're pipelining it and running it through all sorts of
> cool transformations and in general ignoring the folks who *like* editing
> XML in text editors, then entities very likely do "blow."

Do you think the future of /XML/ editing is going to be done in text 
editors?

Rob!

> 
> Amy!

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>

• References:
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Toni Uusitalo <toni.uusitalo@p...>
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Jeff Rafter <lists@j...>
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• Next by Date: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• Previous by thread: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• Next by thread: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread