[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: SLAIX (was: Can XLink be fixed)

• To: "'Mike Champion'" <mc@x...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: SLAIX (was: Can XLink be fixed)
• From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>
• Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 18:22:06 -0400
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <J6MIQPIH73PMNMTND0PL06VPJHZWZU.3d5aaf4a@MChamp>

Hi Mike,
Mike said:
May the gods have mercy on our miserable souls! XML was supposed to
simplify SGML,
now there will be a rush to SGML because it is so much simpler than XML
:~)

Not a substantive criticism of SLAIX, just whining about the unfairness
of life, sorry.

Didier replies:
The more I look at the XML world the more I am inclined to come to the
same conclusion. Its funny to see how groups wanting to make better
things than actual standards tend to make things equal or worse. I guess
that in a chaotic world, complexity, in the mid term, seems more
attractive than simplicity. Now that we learned a lot from W3C and ISO
experience maybe we need a third revolution in order to simplify XML :-)
I saw several attempts but no birds started to fly. I think that we
still need an XML dev site where we can post papers and why not, maybe
provide a simplified XML. Was Kuhn right? Do we need constructive
destruction in order to progress? Is W3C jammed in its own paradigm and
subject to the camel phenomenon (you know the horse thing that become a
camel)? Are groups able to make simple things? Would W3C be able to
design languages like C and systems like Unix? Hummm, I'll jump on my
bike and take a ride, I need some fresh air :-)

Cheers
Didier PH Martin

• References:
  • Re: SLAIX (was: Can XLink be fixed)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Can XLink be fixed?
• Next by Date: RE: What the .... ? Referencing XSL stylesheets across domains
• Previous by thread: Re: SLAIX (was: Can XLink be fixed)
• Next by thread: Re: SLAIX (was: Can XLink be fixed)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread