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

Re: Nesting XML based languages and scripting languages

• From: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@i...>
• To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...>, <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 02:03:55 -0700

>Hmm; bear in mind that XSL is a year away, probably, from being a W3C
>Recommendation.  Thus anybody who charges into implementation of a moving
>target is incurring some risk as well as potential benefit<<


What about us poor authors!! We have to write "knowledgeably" about a
subject that doesn't even exist. Our books usually appear at about the same
time as a spec which invalidates every thing we have written!!

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
To: xml-dev@i... <xml-dev@i...>
Date: Thursday, April 23, 1998 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: Nesting XML based languages and scripting languages


>At 05:50 PM 4/23/98 -0700, Don Park wrote:
>>However, I have heard through the grapevine that there is a lot of XSL
>>development activities at Microsoft with at least one project close to
>>completion.
>
>Hmm; bear in mind that XSL is a year away, probably, from being a W3C
>Recommendation.  Thus anybody who charges into implementation of a moving
>target is incurring some risk as well as potential benefit; at least one
>early-XML-adopter is right now feeling the pain of retrofitting case-
>sensitivity into running code with an installed base.
>
>Having said that, it's good that people charge ahead with implementation
>of pre-release specs because it tends to reveal problems that you just
>don't notice until you implement.  And having said *that*, I think that
>anyone who implements a business-critical application based on an
>unfinished, unratified spec has shitferbrains.
>
>There have certainly been instances, inside W3C committees, where vendors
>have argued against changes on the grounds that they'd already implemented
>things; so far, such objections have generally failed to carry the day.
>
>On which subject, check out the "Status of this Document" language
>in the namespace working draft, elegantly authored by Ralph Swick and
>Ora Lassila for the RDF activity, and stolen by me for namespaces.
>
>Bottom line: yes, there are advantages to being inside the process,
>but early implementation is a two-edged sword. -T.
>
>
>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
>Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
>To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following
message;
>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
>
>


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: Re: Semantics (was Re: Inheritance in XML [^*])
• Next by Date: Re: Open Standards Processes (WAS Re: Nesting XML based languages and scripting languages)
• Previous by thread: Re: Nesting XML based languages and scripting languages
• Next by thread: Attribute question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread