[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: limits of the generic
Tim Bray writes: > Hmm, clearly nobody would argue that *all* aspects of HTML practice > are just fine, or we could shut down and go home. As I understand > it, the HTML WG is mandated with finding ways to improve existing Web > practice. Certainly - but I think the HTML WG would prefer to do that within the context of HTML practice rather than "what's good for XML must be good for HTML." > The argument is over the technical details of how we do > this. I wish it was that simple; I don't believe that it is. > My position is that to the extent that documents can be > self-describing, you win. I certainly don't deny that there's a cost > in verbosity and that the trade-off is not obvious. -Tim HTML documents are pretty well described. I'm not sure that adding XLink to them improves the quality of the description in any substantial way, except perhaps to those rare people whose only comprehension of hypertext markup is through XLink. ------------- Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA http://simonstl.com may be my URI http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|