• To: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: ConciseXML syntax --> no thank u!
• From: "Rodriguez, Sergio" <srodriguez@c...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:56:30 -0600
• List-help: <mailto:xml-dev-help@l...>
• List-subscribe: <mailto:xml-dev-subscribe@l...>
• List-unsubscribe: <mailto:xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...>

Greetings, XML-DEV.

This is not an immprovement of XML 1.0, this is a SGML subset with some
wierd compatibility notions with XML...

Why bother to proposed another markup language?
XML was intendend to be a much simple subset of SGML and to be interoperable
with HTML.  In my first perception, "ConciseXML" is not interoperable like
XML...

By the way, why not include the AND connectors of the SGML/DTD to the
structure of "ConciseXML"? Therefore it wouldn't be even closer to XML.

Sergio Rodríguez.
CANELLA, S. A.
C.A. / GT.

• Prev by Date: RE: ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
• Next by Date: RE: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Previous by thread: RE: Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: more pate nt fun
• Next by thread: RE: Adam Bosworth Article - what does "direct access" m ean?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread