• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:09:07 -0800
• In-reply-to: <06f201c1a066$d26139a0$2cd0a340@paultx>
• References: <NCBBKFMJCLIMOBIGKFMJMEBBHBAA.ldodds@i...>

At 01:26 PM 18/01/02 -0800, Paul T wrote:
>And of course there is no information
>in RDDL paper itself. Heck, they did not even
>bother to provide a *single* example in their
>'specification'. Unbelievable bullshit. Can you
>think of any technical paper describing some
>syntax with not a single example?

Er Paul, go back and look a little closer. 

And please be more polite. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: Paul T <pault12@p...>

• References:
  • RE: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
  • Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
    • From: Paul T <pault12@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be solved by RDDL)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task tobe solved by RDDL)
• Previous by thread: rddl people. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out TheNoise)
• Next by thread: Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread