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

Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch

• To: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Subject: Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 08:47:19 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <oprk18a51jezizxn@s...> from Mike Champion at "Feb 23,2003 01:29:19 pm"

Mike Champion scripsit:

> It seems to me that Sean raises a more profound issue. If XML has brought 
> real interoperability benefits despite widespread non-conformance to the 
> spec (whether we call the non-conformance "bugs" or "features"), then the 
> argument that the benefits are threatened by non-conformant implementations 
> seems highly suspect.

It's not about non-conformant implementations.  It's about non-conformant
specifications: i.e. subset specifications that claim to be the real thing.
The Sun specification makes it impossible to use a conformant XML parser as
a J2ME implementation.

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@c...
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
        --_The Hobbit_

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: "Lauren Wood" <lauren@t...>
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Could someone give a precise definition to these terms and the relationships between them?
• Next by Date: Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Previous by thread: [ANN] Montreal information for Extreme 2003
• Next by thread: Re: re: The J2ME pseudo-XML botch
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread