• From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>
• To: "Michael Fuller" <MICHAEL.S.FULLER@s...>,"Rick Yorgason" <rick@f...>
• Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 09:17:42 +0100

Original Message From: "Michael Fuller"
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:00:26AM -0400, Rick Yorgason wrote:
>> I mean, we're talking about a language that has its roots in *browsers*.
>
> XML does not have its roots in browsers.
> It has its roots in SGML (actually, XML *is* SGML) ...

Is XML with namespaces still SGML?  I don't know, but I'm guessing not.

Either way, for my money, the time to be concerned about SGML heritage has 
long since past.  XML should stand on its own now.

> In fact, with HTML 5, the HTML community has taken a sharp
> turn _away_ from the relationship with SGML/XML.

To me the evolution of HTML is an illustration that things can change and 
evolve and still be coped with.  It may not be pretty, but I imagine that if 
HTML had not moved beyond 1.0 all web sites would be Flash now :-)

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
Twitter: http://twitter.com/petecordell

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>

• References:
  • XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@f...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@f...>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Michael Fuller <MICHAEL.S.FULLER@s...>