- From: len bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 18:27:07 -0500
- To: "Digitome Ltd." <sean@digitome.com>
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Digitome Ltd. wrote: > > [Andrew Layman] > > The whole point of XML is to have an > > infinitely-extensible, self-describing syntax that allows the structure > > of a document to be determined by a very simple, regular parser. > > Pointing out that structural limitations in public XML can be solved by > > private hacks just gets us farther away from this goal. > > For what its worth I think XML (well XML-Lang actually) is already > too complex and would have preferred a lot less syntax that we > currently have. We are on a slippery slope with empty tags - on the > way to pushing XML up the hill to the point where it will become > fully fledged SGML:-( If you need this power use SGML now! Lets > not make the mistake of reinventing it with XML. > > Sean Exactly. Here is the rub: what is the market for XML if most low-level apps can be handled by HTML and <object, high-level apps are handled by SGML and things in between are Word or FoxPro? The slippery slope is still the murky line between application developer rights and the rights of the specification of a markup language to restrict application development techniques to ensure interoperability over portable data. Where is the line? Why? When one says "developed for the Web", does that have any real substantial meaning any longer? len
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 1997 19:27:33 UTC