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

Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?

• From: James Robertson <jamesr@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 17:18:28 +1100

At 16:57 17/01/2001, you wrote:

>Sorry if you assumed it was some kind of insiderism. The reason
>we used it was that the IETF has a silly little tradition
>of using an 8 character or less short name for sessions so that
>it will fit on a small format schedule. "contextualization" wouldn't
>fit so we used c15n. Nothing sinister, just a silly acronym
>game...

If you say so.

So we are naming standards simply so they can fit in
an internally-used IETF "small format schedule"?

Had it occured to you that "contextualisation" may
be a meaningless word in the first place?

J


-------------------------
James Robertson
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
Illumination: an out-of-the-box Intranet solution

http://www.steptwo.com.au/
jamesr@s...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
    • From: Steve Tinney <stinney@s...>

• References:
  • Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
    • From: James Robertson <jamesr@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Next by Date: Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Previous by thread: RE: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Next by thread: Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread