• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:29:51 -0500

Some of us are just egg-centric 
and in search of the next chicken.

Anyway, since SGML is entity-based and that's 
where the toys came from, it's hard to lay that 
at their feet.  You might want to have a chat 
with the mil-spec folks who did 38784 since many  
of the really overbuilt DTDs started there.  
Then there were the database heads who claimed 
one couldn't say database and document in the 
same sentence without using an oxymoron.

Some of us know why a DOCTYPE has a lot 
in common with a Texas-style sliding tie. 
Actually, Neill Kipp had to explain that 
one to me.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Franz [mailto:snowhare@n...]

It gets back to the 'data centric' vice 'document centric' issue. SGMLer's
seem to instinctivly go document centric while people like myself
instinctively go data centric.

• Prev by Date: RE: Newbie
• Next by Date: Re: XML Linking 1.0 and XML Base become W3C Recommendations
• Previous by thread: Re: Define a root in a DTD
• Next by thread: Re: Define a root in a DTD
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread