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

re: re: [SML] Without attrs, you don't need empty elements...

• From: rev-bob@g...
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: 30 Nov 99 10:06:33 -0500

Excuse me, I mistyped:

> All of a sudden, we're forgetting the *people* altogether and trying to see how simple
> we can make the *parser* - "do we really *need* to support Unicode, do we need to 
> support decimal *and* hex, and how about throwing elements out the window while 
> we're at it?"  Doesn't this miss the whole point of simplifying the language so newbies 
> can climb on board easier?  I don't mind if the aim has been changed, but I don't think
> it should be changed without some sort of announcement to that effect.

Naturally, that "throwing elements out" should read "throwing *attributes* out".  Mea 
culpa.



 Rev. Robert L. Hood  | http://rev-bob.gotc.com/
  Get Off The Cross!  | http://www.gotc.com/

Download NeoPlanet at http://www.neoplanet.com


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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: RE: [SML]
• Next by Date: Re: SML - a vote against
• Previous by thread: [SML][LONG]Why i don't like SML [was: Re: sml without...
• Next by thread: SML - a vote against
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread