Re: Too late, is it?

> I get a chuckle every time I imagine the look on the face of the
> mythical CS grad as he or she reads that "weasel-worded" paragraph.
> And here we were complaining about the language of RE handling in
> the SGML standard.

I don't think it matters -- XML has now become ugly enough that I doubt
we'll see many implementations.  I suspect that the ERB really wants it
to fail so they can get on with HTML and not bother with that old-fashioned
SGML community any more... when the school of architects wins out over
the school of engineers, many interesting new buildings get built... badly.

If you want a clean language, design one.  If you want SGML compatibility,
be compatible -- there's no such thing as "nearly conforming".  If you
just want to gain some respectability and kudos for HTML, go away.
The stated (but very ambiguous and vague) goal of making it easier
to deploy SGML over the Internet is not furthered by a language that is
not SGML compliant, is not elegant, is not attractive to programmers, and
is not even HTML compliant.