• From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@g...>
• To: Philip Fearon <pgfearo@g...>
• Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 21:51:41 +0100

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Philip Fearon <pgfearo@g...> wrote:
> I think the ability to hand author XML efficiently is still a good
> quality to seek. Even if people start off with a higher level tool

agreed, though I like the fidelity that xml's verbosity provides and
as others have mentioned with the right tools these level of issues go
away ... I have no doubt that a few years ago that poor xml tooling in
things like dreamweaver (or flash with their unique xml parser and
interpretation of dom) contributed to current webdev pov on XML.

in this respect I don't see why we couldn't just define a 'compact
notation' for full flavoured XML that bakes in some simplification
through profile/convention.

Jim Fuller

• References:
  • Is "Hand Authoring" XML still a critical use case ?
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>
  • Re: Is "Hand Authoring" XML still a critical use case ?
    • From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@g...>
  • RE: Is "Hand Authoring" XML still a critical use case ?
    • From: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>
  • Re: Is "Hand Authoring" XML still a critical use case ?
    • From: Philip Fearon <pgfearo@g...>