Re: Second International Symposium on Invisible XML

Hi again,

As long as we're putting things on the record, I would like to add that
"Defiant XML" would make an awesome conference title, for the right
conference.

Defiantly, Wendell

On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 12:39 PM Wendell Piez <wapiez@wendellpiez.com>
wrote:

> Bethan writes:
>
> >> It only brings unnecessary debates to the forefront.
> > If the debates are about whether we want to grow our community by
> redefining it for the benefit of people who are hostile to XML, then I
> think those debates are absolutely necessary.
>
> Those are not the debates to which I refer.
>
> Also, most of the rest of the post seems to be directed at someone who
> wants to disparage, denigrate or detract from iXML. I don't know who that
> is, in this conversation.
>
> It is true that my choice of the word "defiant" imputes an intention (to a
> title and, I suppose, to those who have chosen it), when all I really have
> is an impression. In other words, I am projecting defiance, where there may
> be none. Am I the only one in this conversation who is imputing an
> intention, when all we really have is words? (I can explain my intention,
> what I mean or think I meant, yet I keep saying things that are received in
> an entirely different light.)
>
> As to "what satisfies me", you seem to be under the impression I would
> not be satisfied with the outcome you recommend, and I have not said that
> at all. I am merely defending the contrary point of view, in a balance of multiple
> considerations. Call it a 60/40 preference.
>
> Probably even that is a mistake, now, since I have made my impressions
> probably clearer than I should have. There is no use being offended because
> someone is offended by something I didn't say or didn't mean to say -- and
> my feelings (or others' feelings about my supposed feelings) are not what
> is at issue. :-) I am only answering because opinions were solicited, I
> don't even get to decide!
>
> Cheers-ish, Wendell
>
> (Then Norm writes a message that might be characterized as defiant. Or
> not!)
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 12:07 PM Bethan Tovey-Walsh <
> bytheway@linguacelta.com> wrote:
>
>> Putting 'XML' or 'iXML' defiantly into the title doesn't make anyone feel
>> better about anything:
>>
>>
>> It makes me feel better not to see the work I and my colleagues have done
>> on IXML swept into the background in favour of some nebulously-defined
>> thing that, so far, barely exists outside IXML.
>>
>> I have been on the working group that manages the invisible XML spec
>> since before v1 was published. This is my first ever experience of
>> contributing to any such project, and I'm proud of what we've accomplished.
>> Most of us were not working on "invisible markup" in general, but on IXML,
>> specifically. It came as a surprise to me to realize last year that the
>> group's official title is the "Invisible markup community group", because
>> we've all been calling it the IXML CG, and referring to meetings of the
>> IXML CG. This mailing list is the "public-ixml" mailing list. The website
>> is at "invisiblexml.org". Most of Steven's initial published work, which
>> brought us all together to work on the technology, was explicitly XML
>> focused, even when presented at general markup fora such as Balisage.
>>
>> As I've already said, I'm a big fan of invisible markup as a theoretical
>> approach, as well as a fan of the concrete work already done by David and
>> Ronald. But the work *I* have been doing - and the work done by almost
>> everyone else involved so far in this project - has been on IXML. It's
>> absolutely fantastic that we now want to open this up. We can (for example)
>> argue that IXML is the first, and very successful, example of how invisible
>> markup, as a theoretical or abstract approach to markup, can be put into
>> practice. I'm totally sold on that approach, and I absolutely now see the
>> value of slowly focusing more on "invisible markup" and less on IXML
>> specifically.
>>
>> But I don't find it respectful to the work already done, to the community
>> of users and implementers and theorists and scholars who have made IXML
>> successful largely because they really want to do stuff with XML, to say
>> "Yeah, that IXML thing is just going to be contentious and start arguments.
>> Better we don't mention it."
>>
>> it only brings unnecessary debates to the forefront.
>>
>>
>> If the debates are about whether we want to grow our community by
>> redefining it for the benefit of people who are hostile to XML, then I
>> think those debates are absolutely necessary.
>>
>> I am the first to say that prejudice against technologies is not like
>> prejudice against people's inherent characteristics such as race or sex or
>> disability. Nonetheless, being prejudiced against a technology to the
>> extent that you can't possibly be part of a community that mentions that
>> technology, without very serious moral or ethical reasons for your
>> objections, is infantile. And if there are serious moral or ethical
>> objections to XML (or even fairly trivial ones), I haven't yet heard them.
>> The only serious objections I've ever heard voiced against the X-stack have
>> been a combination of the technical and the political. The former I can
>> respect. The latter can get to heck.
>>
>> But it is not about hiding it, really, and I would feel better if people
>> stopped saying that. It is about what is emphasized.
>>
>>
>> Last year, IXML was in the symposium title. This year, we're proposing
>> that it should form part of a subtitle, with top billing going to
>> "invisible markup". You seem to be arguing that this still constitutes
>> "putting IXML defiantly into the title". With respect, it seems that you
>> want IXML removed altogether. If that isn't "hiding it", what is it? I'm
>> genuinely sorry if that wording makes you feel bad, but then I'd like to
>> know how you would describe things instead? Because Elisa and I have,
>> between us, offered options that de-emphasize the X, and they haven't
>> satisfied you, so it doesn't seem solely to be about what is emphasized and
>> what isn't.
>>
>> BTW
>>
>> ****************************************************
>>
>> Dr. Bethan Tovey-Walsh
>>
>> linguacelta.com
>>
>> Golygydd | Editor geirfan.cymru
>>
>> Croeso i chi ysgrifennu ataf yn y Gymraeg
>>
>> On 19 Aug 2026, at 15:54, Wendell Piez <wapiez@wendellpiez.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello again Naming Committee,
>>
>> "iXML and Beyond" addresses my concern about limiting the scope of
>> interest implicitly in the name. But I am not sure (on balance) this is
>> better than something more like the present title. "International Symposium
>> on Invisible Markup 2076". I know the iXML in that title is invisible to
>> the unaided eye.
>>
>> But it is not about hiding it, really, and I would feel better if people
>> stopped saying that. It is about what is emphasized.
>>
>> I fully understand why we have sensitivities around the "XML" acronym: I
>> have my own. But I don't think there is a way around them. Putting 'XML' or
>> 'iXML' defiantly into the title doesn't make anyone feel better about
>> anything: it only brings unnecessary debates to the forefront. I would
>> rather stop fighting those old battles, and talk about the fabulous
>> technologies and initiatives, whatever names their creators give them.
>>
>> Thanks again for reading,
>> Wendell
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 9:54 AM Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 at 14:42, Bethan Tovey-Walsh
>>> <bytheway@linguacelta.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > As Sheila and I have both ailready said, discoverability and name
>>> recognition are worth considering, so I would strongly prefer that IXML be
>>> somewhere in the subtitle, not just XML.
>>>
>>> Anyone old enough may recall the strength of feeling when the 'X' of
>>> xml was discussed?  It was the 'catch'' ,
>>> the name recognition feature that caused heads to raise.
>>>
>>> Perhaps iXML in whatever case just may be the catch here?
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Pawson
>>> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
>>> Docbook FAQ.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ...Wendell Piez... ...wendellpiez.com...
>> ...pellucidliterature.org... ...raventracks.org...
>> ... xproc.zone... ...github.com/wendellpiez...
>>
>>
>
> --
> ...Wendell Piez... ...wendellpiez.com...
> ...pellucidliterature.org... ...raventracks.org...
> ... xproc.zone... ...github.com/wendellpiez...
>


-- 
...Wendell Piez... ...wendellpiez.com...
...pellucidliterature.org... ...raventracks.org...
... xproc.zone... ...github.com/wendellpiez...