• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>
• Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 16:48:09 -0000
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306FEE993@HQ5>

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Note who funded Fielding's paper and the 
> last folks acknowledged in the 
> MIT book you referenced.  I look for the 
> first mover and usually find the subtle 
> but incredibly deep and expressive reach 
> of the hand of the American defense budget.
 
Ok. I'll settle at 1990 :)

Bill de hÓra

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPIT2xuaWiFwg2CH4EQJrfACdH0yYGfDeihrRXEYL3HwNAw6P1UAAoMNs
ZU43FIeel6B2UL/JgnXC1+K2
=JzrX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• References:
  • RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Next by Date: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Previous by thread: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Next by thread: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread