Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Not fishy, but contextural. Perhaps I should have said, the designers. My reference is not to the XML application developers, a category that did not exist prior to the specification of XML, or xml-dev, but to the designers of the specification, most of whom were SGML developers. I agree that most of the XML developers were not SGML developers. That is why they don't know the facts of the history of the development, the reasons for the features in SGML, or how to discriminate between fact and fiction in a presentation except to ascribe hero status to journeyman effort. Len Bullard Intergraph Public Safety clbullar@i... http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:Daniel.Veillard@w...] On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 09:06:20AM -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > 3. As most/all of the XML developers > were SGML developers, Hummm, this one really sound fishy to me... Sorry but I wasn't an SGML developper, ever. 90% of the people I know use my XML code or write XML code parser or XML based apps were not in the SGML familly (most of they were at best in grad school at that time :-). I also think that 95% of them are *not* on xml-dev Daniel P.S.: those people work in the Gnome/Linux and other free software projects. Maybe it's just a different familly of developers not stricto sensus XML developers
|
