• From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@s...>
• To: "David Lee" <dlee@c...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 09:08:15 -0600

Breaking or non-breaking?

Weirdly enough, the paper printing thing works but without the
shredders, turtles lose their jobs.  If you ever work in a SCIF, you'll
appreciate why they wear masks and carry ninja weapons.

True story:  I made the mistake of suggesting to Erik Naggum that LISP
wasn't the best way to get work done.  He replied by stuffing my email
inbox with a few thousand pages of LISP documentation.  My IT guy was
not amused.

Bulk is bulky.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: David Lee [mailto:dlee@c...] 
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 8:40 AM
To: Len Bullard; David Carlisle; Costello, Roger L.
Cc: xml-dev@l...
Subject: RE:  Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes


> Let's just use LISP.  Then we can reclaim our Dark Overlord Priesthood


I suggest using Whitespace for both the serialization format and all XML
toolchains.
Then we'd literally be wearing the Kings New Clothes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_language)

You really can't get much simpler than that.

And think of the security ! printed out on paper the bad guys could
never read our code OR our data ! no need for shredders, obscufication ,
encryption ... so many things would be solved.

----------------------------------------
David A. Lee
dlee@c...
http://www.xmlsh.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• References:
  • Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • RE: Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes
    • From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@s...>
  • RE: Six Reasons Not to use XML Attributes
    • From: David Lee <dlee@c...>