[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Don Park" <donpark@docuverse.com>
- To: <xml-dev@XML.ORG>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 13:29:04 -0700
While I share some of Rick's concerns, I disagree with his
suggested solution which amounts to same-tax-for-everyone.
Extensible parser frameworks will soon allow applications to
easily add new capabilities such as xml:base and xml:include,
and new character encodings. Going beyond simple extensibility,
I see nothing that prevents us from writing parsers that can
change itself at runtime to handle SML (Minimal XML), Common XML,
XML, and even HTML. All it takes is some creative error handling.
I also think your call for boycotting of parsers that do not
support rich set of encodings is going overboard. Most popular
XML parsers are open source and available for free. All it takes
is one average engineer to add a new encoding support. Is this
too much to expect from four billion people?
Best,
Don Park - mailto:donpark@docuverse.com
Docuverse - http://www.docuverse.com
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************
|
