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

RE: Dangers of Subsetting? (was RE: Pull-based XML parsers?)

• From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:18:13 -0800

> From: Rick JELLIFFE [mailto:ricko@g...]
> [...]
> The innovation that Mike is talking about, the ability to use the name
> of a clearly specified technology developed by a known group of people
> with a known set of intents, but alter it in any way that one 
> sees fit,
> might be called "lying" by some, and "passing off" by others, but most
> importantly is also called "embrace and extend".

I'm inclined to agree with your remarks, except for your characterization of
"embrace and extend". In my mind, "embrace and extend" means the tool
supports the standard, but does not limit itself to the standard; it
incorporates functionality that goes beyond the standard. Everybody does
this, and that's a good thing; it drives innovation.

If I get a tool, though, for which the vendor claims it embraces and extends
the standard, and I find it does not properly support the standard, as far
as I'm concerned, the vendor is lying. Unfortunately, many vendors do lie
about such things.

• Prev by Date: Re: Dangers of Subsetting? (was RE: Pull-based XML parsers?)
• Next by Date: RE: Subsetting/ Canonical Parsers/ XML Compliance/ etc.
• Previous by thread: RE: Dangers of Subsetting? (was RE: Pull-based XML parsers?)
• Next by thread: RE: Dangers of Subsetting? (was RE: Pull-based XML parsers?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread