xml-dev - Re: SAX2 Lexical Handler Suggestions

[Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@geotempo.com>]

David Megginson wrote:
> ... Besides, it's not just
> *your* extension at stake -- other people will care just as strongly
> about different features, and in the end, all XML-based tools and specs
> will become CORBA-like (bloated, unusable, mutually-incompatible, and
> nearly impossible for a sane person to understand). ...

Oops too late :-)

I know many people who think that about XML 1.0 (without namespaces,
schemas, paths, pointers, links, transformations) etc.    It seems that
people define their sanity by how well they can explain life around
them; up pops XML like a Martian and many people have legitimate
difficulties figuring it out. Many other people are practical: they
cannot understand something until they use it.

But is this problem with the techonology or something intrinsic to
humans?  Some things that are difficult at first are simple later (e.g.
driving) but other things that are easy at first cause untold
complications later (e.g. forgetting about i18n in standards) or
selfishly defer the complication to others (e.g. WAI accessibility
issues).  

To me, Perl is a very complex, immemorable and stupid language: but many
people love it. It is the right size and provides the right breadth for
a decent class of applications, to them.  Where it goes right is by
having modules IMHO.  But yuck.

Rick