[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Richard Lanyon <rgl@decisionsoft.com>
- To: xml-dev@XML.ORG
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 17:05:28 +0000 (GMT)
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Ann Navarro wrote:
> XML, in good part, is about *not needing* to pick one single way to do
> things. You don't need to have people declaring 'best viewed in X browser'
> any longer.
>
> There's nothing incompatible nor non-interoperable about well-formed and
> valid XML.
There's nothing /syntactically/ inoperable about it, no, but at least
some of the problems with, say, viewing the same HTML page in
different browsers are /semantic/ - they're to do with how you
display (i.e. interpret) a given element/attribute. If you want to be
semantically interoperable XML per se isn't going to help much.
As far as this particular debate goes, there can be a great deal of
inoperability if someone decides to mark up a text with less
"granularity" than is required for the structure someone else is
trying to fit it into.
--
Richard Lanyon (Software Engineer) | "The medium is the message"
XML Script development, | - Marshall McLuhan
DecisionSoft Ltd. |
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
