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

RE: breaking up?

  • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • To: Mike.Champion@S..., xml-dev@l...
  • Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 09:43:23 -0500

RE: breaking up?
That worked for the SGML implementors who didn't need the options.  The
inventor of SGML once told me he was surprised more didn't do that.  The
trick is selling it.   If the web has demonstrated anything, though, it convinces
me that the need to belong followed by the need to dominate are so ingrained
in mammals as to be instinct.   We lead by plausible logic then dominate
by plausible promises.  In truth, the future is what you are willing to
fight for and that is why the instinct is to belong first.  You have to make it
happen and making it happen means choosing who chooses choices.
No one owns the intellectual property and it takes deep pockets to
fight for copyrights and trademarks.  Avoid the latter, use the former
as you see fit.  Interoperability like religion is "a smile on a dog".



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

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike.Champion@S... [mailto:Mike.Champion@S...]

> From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@a...]
> Too bad we can't go back and start over with the benefit of hindsight.

Why can't we? SOMEBODY is going to do this SOMEDAY ... why not us, now?

You don't need a new standards body or sanctioned working group to document an XML subset (or SGML profile, if you want) that simply ignores the stuff that doesn't carry its weight.  "Just say no" to defaulted attributes, ambiguous namespaces, validating with schema languges that are harder to use than to write procedural business logic, and so on.  Even if implementers can't "go back and start over", users can ignore that which doesn't help them solve real problems, authors and consultants can recommend that which does work, purchases can be made on the basis of what really works, etc.

If the folks "leading the web to its full potential" via the PSVI-oriented specs turn around in a couple of years and discover that no one is following, why is that a problem for the rest of us?  Conversely, if they *do* sort it all out and make it work in the real world someday, what have we lost by letting them do the bleeding on the bleeding edge?


Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
First Name
Last Name
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.

Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.