RE: XML 2.0 Specifications and working groups
On Friday, October 12, 2001 8:08 AM, David Lyon wrote: > > Since XML 1.0 has been with us for around 4 years, it seems > to me that it may well be time that some specifications for version 2.0 start > to take place. > I'm sure there's a logical reason for this opinion, but I cannot seem to come up with one. Just because something is mature doesn't mean its time for an upgrade. > Back to business though, I've spoken with a lot of business > users and they are saying that they would like a more lightweight, faster > and smaller beast than XML Version 1.0 has become. > XML Version 1.0 hasn't changed (aside from some errata corrections) since February 1998. How has it become such a big beast? > Reliability and interoperability have proved problems in the > eyes of some people also. Many of these issues could be resolved in version 2.0. > XML is not a protocol - it has nothing to do with reliability. XML is, obviously, quite interoperable. > I'm interested in hearing from anybody with an interest in > working on the XML 2.0 specification as well as those who may be interested in > sponsoring the efforts. The closest thing to another version of XML these days might be Blueberry . Blueberry intends to provide broader Unicode support.  http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-blueberry-req
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format