- From: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 03:31:35 +0200
- To: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Cc: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>, Hans Franke <raffzahn@yahoo.de>, public-microxml <public-microxml@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 6:35 AM, James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 10:54 PM, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> wrote: > >> I think it's very important to have a new short specification. People >> should not have to read hundreds of pages of core XML specs and then >> be told to throw away most of them to understand MicroXML. > > I very much agree. I think this is a key part of the value of MicroXML. +1 it should be a stated goal to generate a succinct version of the MicroXML spec … we should shave off every non data pixel and amaze anyone reading it at both its precision and economical definition. perhaps using 2 phase documentation process heads off the vagaries of decision by committee e.g. a larger annotated document that serves as 'living' document and a transform to succinct version. J Bonus round 0 = might be useful to consider using Robin Berjon https://github.com/darobin/respec Bonus round 1 = source doc is MicroXML and could be transformed to final formats with zero energy. Bonus round 2 = SVG output of spec in graphical/picture form
Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2012 01:32:04 UTC