Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: What does it mean to say that XML was over-engineered?
 On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 2:22 PM Liam R. E. Quin <liam@fromoldbooks.org> wrote: Nor i. MicroXML quietly died as far as i can tell. MicroXML isn't dead, it's just _finished_. I usually say this about software to people who think a program that hasn't been changed in two months, or years, or whatever, is "dead". My favorite example is the command-line utility `cal`, which hasn't changed (except for internationalization and titlecasing) since 1979. Similarly, microxml Technically. The only time that CDATA attribute normalization ever affected any documents I was working with, it was working against me. Some upstream system was encapsulating whole RFC 822 emails in XML attributes, and of course when they came out of XML format again they were no longer RFC 822 because all the headers were smashed together with the body. I got back to the perpetrators and told them to put emails in an element or else. They did. So, you drop DTDs, and internal subsets, and now you need a Or you get a real keyboard driver and type é. We've got what we've got - let's agree to cherish it for its strengths IPv4 is still essential and probably always will be, but without IPv6 it would have been impossible to put all the cell phones in the world on the Web. Even the most cherished standards end up being inadequate to the task eventually.  [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
|
|||||||||
