- From: Jean Paoli <jeanpa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:38:21 -0800
- To: "'Jon Bosak'" <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>, "'cbullard@hiwaay.net'" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- Cc: "'w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org'" <w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org>
I fully agree with Len. My take : We already have to sell today to the Web community the whole xml concept of extensibility and I think inventing tons of words does not help focus. Let us make it simple. My proposal: xml syntax xml link (or xml hypertext) xml stylesheet >---------- >From: Len Bullard[SMTP:cbullard@hiwaay.net] >Sent: Monday, January 27, 1997 10:46 AM >To: Jon Bosak >Cc: w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org >Subject: Re: Name for XML-LINK (Was: Re: Initial draft of XML-Link...) > >Jon Bosak wrote: >> >> [Tim Bray:] >> >> | 3. Note that one of the areas remaining undecided is: what do we call >> | this puppy? In the draft, it veers amusingly between being called XHL >> | (Extensible Hyper Linkage) and XHA (X. Hypertext Architecture), >> | depending on who wrote the section; Jon Bosak always says "XML-Link", >> | but I don't know if that represents an opinion. >> >> I would like to keep "XML" in there somewhere as a marketing ploy to >> build name recognition for a suite of integrated (albeit separately >> usable) standards, but that's just my opinion. >> >> | I *think* [Jon, shout if you disagree] that this would be an area to >> | which the WG could usefully turn their attention, during the very >> | short time before we start to emit large numbers of votable items in >> | Michael's A., B., C., style to provide a structure for the meat & >> | potatoes debate. >> >> Sure, as long as it doesn't distract from the rest of the discussion. >> Perhaps people who have an opinion on this could simply state it and >> try to avoid protracted interchanges. The business of naming will be >> decided by the ERB, and they will remember brief statements better >> than long debates. >> >> Jon > >XML works fine. The issue of separation is one for the normative >text. I think expressing the idea that this is an integrated suite is >important to understanding the overall intent of XML and its flexibility >for implementors. The WG has provided a set of specifications that >taken as a whole, describe an integrated design for applying generalized >markup to Internet hypermedia. The separability of the components >of the specification enable each implementation to be effective within >the required environment. Thus, an implementor can plan for a stable >migration to the entire suite, choose a valid subset for a particular >requirement, or implement the entire suite. > >len bullard > >
Received on Monday, 27 January 1997 18:39:06 UTC