- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 11:22:47 -0400
- To: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com
- Cc: unicode@unicode.org, unicore@unicode.org, www-international@w3.org
At 3:20 PM +0100 6/21/01, Misha.Wolf@reuters.com wrote: >The Blueberry requirements [1] are very thoughtfully written and >do *not* make any of the errors you describe. I suggest a second >reading. > I don't think I said the Blueberry requirements were in error, just that they're wrong-headed. The document makes the problem sound a lot worse than it is. If the requirements actually said just how limited the problems they're fixing are, then it would seem a lot less necessary to fix them. My main point is this: the problems being addressed are small and theoretical. (I suppose IBM's problem is not theoretical, but IBM can damn well fix its own software without polluting XML for the rest of us.) There is no justification here for a new, incompatible version of XML. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | The XML Bible (IDG Books, 1999) | | http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/books/bible/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764532367/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://metalab.unc.edu/javafaq/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2001 11:26:05 UTC