• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Subject: Re: XML is not extensible
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
• Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:10:01 +0000
• Cc: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Organization: Propylon
• References: <3E22956C.1050402@p...> <3E22E1EA.9090704@t...>
• Reply-to: bill.dehora@p...
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Tim Bray wrote:
> Bill de hÓra wrote:
> 
>> Let's be clear about what XML extensibility is. When we say XML is 
>> extensible, we are saying encoding a domain specific language in XML 
>> allows that language to be extensible
> 
> 
> No, not at all.  All the "X" part of the name means is, you can make up 
> your own tags.  

Yep. You use XML to inscribe another language. You don't/can't 
extend it (to create what some folk would call little language).

> The real problem with the name "XML" (and with the title 
> of your posting) is that XML isn't a markup language.  Snicker. 

You're not saying anything counter to what I've said already, so I'm 
not sure where the problem is. Perhaps we're in violent agreement. 
Snicker.

Bill de hÓra

• References:
  • XML is not extensible
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
  • Re: XML is not extensible
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpressions vs. XML)
• Next by Date: Re: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-expressions vs. XML)
• Previous by thread: Re: XML is not extensible
• Next by thread: RE: [XML-dev] Instrument DTD
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread