• From: Al Snell <alaric@a...>
• To: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>
• Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 18:01:01 +0100 (BST)

On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Stephen D. Williams wrote:

> I understand that what I'm doing might not make it to a standard.  The
> point is to aim for something that is suitable for a standard as set of
> design constraints.  Saying that it is intended to be the generic
> 'binary structured XML' equivalent to XML 1.0 implies all those
> constraints.

Indeed, an approach I take with all design projects is that even if we
can't agree on a standard that meets everyone's needs, or even a workable
subset of everyone's needs, and end up killing each other in a massive
flame war, then at least our assembled notes will be very useful material
for people working on related projects in future :-)

> sdw

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software  

• References:
  • Re: Binary XML - summary of discussion to date
    • From: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Next by Date: RE: Linkbases, Topic Maps, and RDF Knowledge Bases -- help me
• Previous by thread: Re: Binary XML - summary of discussion to date
• Next by thread: RE: Binary XML - summary of discussion to date
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread