- From: Jon Bosak <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 16:22:09 -0800
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
[Peter Flynn:] | > XML-CORE: fully supported or no support at all | > XML-LINK: fully supported or no support at all | > XML-STYLE: fully supported or no support at all (By the way, the thing that everyone is calling XML-CORE is actually called xml-lang.) | > Now really sit back and let that sink in a minute. If you want to develop | > an XML processor/application, you either support CORE or not. Fine so far. | > But if you want *any* linking or stylesheets (and you can't approach HTML's | > functionality at all without both) then you must implement both *completely*. | | Yep. I think any attempt at XML implementation without both of those is | entirely wasted. I can already get all of that with Panorama or Multidoc | Pro. It's interesting (glancing briefly forward as I try to catch up with my mail) that subsequent discussion in this thread seems to have focused on uses of lang+link without style and missed this assertion that xml-lang is useless all by itself. There will be *thousands* of applications that use xml-lang alone for the exchange of structured data between processes and among databases. In fact, based purely on the number of applications (i.e., running pieces of code), I wouldn't be surprised if there were ultimately more XML applications that used XML without links or styles than ones that did. A lot of these applications will be invisible to the user, but that doesn't mean that they won't be there. Jon
Received on Thursday, 27 March 1997 19:22:16 UTC