[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Will XML change the character of W3C?
The people are the same and the experience of these people made the next step possible. The point is, it didn't happen in a vacuum. People with lots of experience had to get together and agree, and those agreements involved some noisy mail. They based it on the work they had done. If XSL had continued with Schema (the language), it would have died on the vine. Some thought it should have gone forward with that having seen the FOSI roast on the pointy bracket spit, but in the end, it seems they realized that it was better to roast it than let it chill. Had XML not been a W3C project, it is likely (if deRose could have gotten his pages and pages and pages of changes in), it could have come from ISO. It is hard to imagine how the barriers, real and political that were being erected could have been torn down though. Going to the W3C was the fastest way to go around the Imagi-Not Line. Frankly, I would have preferred ISO but I saw the personalities in action and knew that wasn't going to happen. Don't ever tell anyone that a group of saints created XML, just pragmatists. It comes down to individuals. I repeat it for emphasis, and folks, not always nice, courtly, ones. Sometimes someone has to be BerserkerOnTheBridge and that is not a job for a nice person. It is a job that sometimes needs a hypeSter to clean up. Yet point by point, nasty or nice, each paragraph gets hammered into the final draft. Abstract or concrete, by law, XML is a subset of SGML. That was the compromise that made the deal possible. XML changes no characters anywhere. It just makes them the same everywhere. It is a bridge. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean@d...] At 09:09 AM 10/16/00 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: >XML is SGML-lite. XSLT is DSSSL recast. The former is true in the abstract but not in the concrete as anyone who has tried to process XML with pre-XML SGML tools will tell you. The latter has no basis in fact that I am aware of other than that they both share the same general approach. The same could be said of a lot of acronym tuples (GIF,BMP), (MP3,WAV) etc. I don't think it helps much. If anything, XSLT is what you get if you take the part of DSSSL that was never implemented and re-engineer it from scratch.
|
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
|