• To: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>
• Subject: Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
• From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>
• Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 17:23:44 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <4203F15A.2070109@k...>
• Organization: The Mysthical World of Talsever!
• References: <6.0.0.22.0.20050204222038.02251d70@p...><20050204204803.GA31024@t...><4203E19D.2030607@j...><20050204214937.GA31170@t...><4203F15A.2070109@k...>

On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:04:10 -0800
Robert Koberg <rob@k...> wrote:
> Do you think the future of /XML/ editing is going to be done in text 
> editors?

I can't see any reason to change.  Part of the point of XML was that it
was a text-based format, easy to edit.  My experience with XML editors
that try to hide things from me is [censored].

Amy!
(that's just the way I sign my name ... try to cope)
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis                    amyzing {at} talsever.com
    Songs and fame are vain endeavor--
    only two things fail us never,
    only two things last forever--
    sorrow and love, sorrow and love ....
                -- The Last Song of Sirit Byar

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>

• 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...>
  • Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
    • From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>

• 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