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

RE: Xml is _not_ self describing

• To: 'Ronald Bourret' <rpbourret@r...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:26:18 -0600

Yes.  Suddenly they have to know what a DOCTYPE is, 
and worse, they may have to build one.  Full-up 
markup implementations lead to a division of labor 
in most medium size shops.

On the other hand, I live in a world where the 
tech writers are clinging to WinHelp like a 
life preserver in the North Atlantic.  The 
fact that everyone around them is dead or 
freezing escapes them as long as they can 
still kick against the waves.  Organizational 
learning curves are always multi-variant and 
messy looking.  We can average but it tells 
us not much.

Eventually, someone has to sit down and design. 
That is why the best practices docs Costello 
compiles and to which we contribute have a 
value beyond the XML-Dev archives as long 
as we continue to update them.  We are the 
freakin' pioneers.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@r...]

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
> HTML led them to believe one could type it in,
> open the browser, and magic would happen.  XML
> makes them aware of the man behind the curtains.

Very true. XML also makes them the man behind the curtains. Suddenly
being in this position (and not realizing it) is what confuses XML
newbies (myself included) the most.

• Prev by Date: ZVON: RelaxNG testsuite in Example repository
• Next by Date: Re: RDDL possibilities
• Previous by thread: RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
• Next by thread: RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread