[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)
--- Len Bullard <cbullard@h...> wrote: > How many of the original XML parsers were open > source? With all the noise > this list makes about open source, are you telling > me that keeping up SGMLS > or its successor is just too difficult for the > markup community? I'm sure we will see it, when people interested in recycling the old technology (or replacing SGML) start using and developing it? > I don't buy it. As I said, this isn't a slam on > XML. XML is a Good Thing. > This is a "if you plan to reinvent SGML anyway, > maybe it's time to fess up > to needing it and use it rather than making up > stories to keep from > admitting that perhaps it was also a good thing". Sure. For people who want more sophisticated (and complicated) things built at language/markup level (instead of application/business level), that's good advice. But I have no desire to reinvent SGML (or, as a parallel, to use many of the more complicated xml extensions on top of basic useful ones), or any of its feature set, so I guess can not really comment much more on the thread. Those who do, will have lots of work to do, independent of which route they take, For me, I think XML (or something simpler, if anything) will do just fine, -+ Tatu +- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|