• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 21:04:13 -0500
• In-reply-to: <080b01c1a084$13bfd1f0$2cd0a340@paultx>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306DF628A@HQ5> <5.1.0.14.2.20020118160029.022ee0d0@p...> <080b01c1a084$13bfd1f0$2cd0a340@paultx>

On Friday 18 January 2002 07:56 pm, Paul T wrote:
> Also, I think that  'RDDL' is not such a subtile thing
> as it may look, because the namespaces are
> in the very core of XML, so playing with these
> entities affects the entire building.

Namespaces, thankfully, aren't in XML 1.0. As this whole thread 
attests, they're a mess. I've thought that since day 1, and have seen 
absolutely no reason to change my opinion. 

• References:
  • RE: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: Paul T <pault12@p...>

• Prev by Date: The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• Next by Date: RE: XML is easy, was: Re: SV: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• Previous by thread: The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• Next by thread: Re: The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread