• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Principles of XML design
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 21:00:33 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20050506214841.546FA2A48F4@m...>
• References: <20050506214841.546FA2A48F4@m...>

On May 6, 2005, at 5:48 PM, Richard Tobin wrote:

> No.  It *could* have been like that, but it isn't.
>
> XML didn't magically appear out of nowhere.  It was designed
> as a subset of SGML, and people already knew what SGML meant,
> and the order of attributes is not significant.

As pointed out earlier, that statement is not always true.... you can 
assert "order of attributes is not significant" as much as you like, to 
which I will reply "to whom?" and happily provide evidence to the 
counter... and don't hand me anything about InfoSet or canonical 
processing model etc. because they are a figment of somebody else's 
imagination in my application.

• References:
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: richard@i... (Richard Tobin)

• Prev by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Next by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Previous by thread: Re: Principles of XML design
• Next by thread: Order of attributes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread