[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: an unfilled need

• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 13:30:09 +0800

 >On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Matthew Gertner wrote:
>
>> No one objected to the W3C controlling XML at the onset because it
was
>> far from a foregone conclusion that XML was win over a number of
>> plausible (but in retrospect clearly inferior) approaches. Now XML is
>> mainstream and this no longer flies.

>  > Lack of complete buyin (not to mention open hostility)  from XML
>  >developers is certainly not in the W3C's interest, and only opens
the
> > way for Microsoft and other major players to step in with their own
> > proprietary (and inevitably less well thought out) approaches.

I disagree on both counts.  Firstly, W3C does not control XML to the
extent that they can control other syntaxes, because XML is SGML.
Secondly, I think that if Microsoft made a successor to XML, it is quite
possible it could be better than XML is, learning from experience. If
Microsoft cares to give me a million dollars, I am prepared to develop
such a thing!

Rick Jelliffe


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • W3C policies (Was Re: an unfilled need)
    • From: Matthew Gertner <matthew@p...>
  • XML belongs to itself. (Re: an unfilled need)
    • From: "Paul Tchistopolskii" <paul@q...>
  • Re: an unfilled need
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@q...>

• Prev by Date: Who's actually into VML?
• Next by Date: Re: an unfilled need
• Previous by thread: Re: an unfilled need
• Next by thread: Re: an unfilled need
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread