RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
> Oh really? So I guess I'm hallucinating when I see client > and server implementations of HTTP each in less than a thousand > lines of code. HTML has *grown* to be difficult to implement > (in its entirety) but it was not so in the early days. Ok, ok, I take it back. HTTP is probably trivial to implement (having not implemented it fully myself). I brought it into the discussion because it's something we all use yet I'm sure we could still find a group of developers that thinks it technically [expletive deleted] for whatever reason. > > ... Major vendors > > embraced them and made it happen. Before the public had easy-to-use > > browsers, they had no idea what resources were available to them. I > > don't remember many successful ad-hoc browser implementations. > > What is an "ad hoc" implementation? Was Netscape a "major vendor"? NCSA? > CERN? Yes, obviously Netscape was the first significant vendor. They made another major vendor take notice and the rest is history. > > > The Web didn't happen because the W3C and/or the major vendors made it > > > happen, it HAPPENED. ... > > > > I completely agree. It was the *vendors* that made it happen. > > That is the most bizarre interpretation of history I've ever heard. How > could Netscape have had a stratospheric IPO if it were not the fact that > the Web was already an exciting information resource. That's easy, because the masses didn't understand the technology. Hope and uncertainty drive the market. -aaron
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