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

Re: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, co

• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Subject: Re: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 22:54:42 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3D498F51.7080701@t...>
• References: <r01050300-1015-5DF9A38CA57611D693BB0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>

At 12:43 PM 8/1/2002 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>
>>To the extent that programmers have influenced the development of XML
>>since version 1.0, I think the impact has been severely negative.
>
>Too simple I think.  Particularly given that almost all of the advantages 
>of XML over SGML were based on the principle of "leave out everything 
>except what programmers actually understand and use." -Tim

Sure, Tim.  That works for XML 1.0.  It doesn't work for much if anything 
after that.

(It sort of works for XSLT, though many people I know who come to XSLT from 
programming have rather strong negative initial reactions.  Is it the 
variable thing?)

Once programmers started _adding_ to markup practice rather than reducing 
markup practice, we wound up with huge mashes of nastiness that take 
eternity to sort out.  Case studies: namespaces, W3C XML Schema, W3C XML 
Query....

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• References:
  • Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs,concrete)
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Next by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Previous by thread: RE: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• Next by thread: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread