xml-dev - RE: It is Pretty Dumb (Was RE: Not so stupid (was re: More StupidXMLArti

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

What Me Worry?  I just use this stuff.  

o  The web is an amplifier.  Without a palm on 
the strings, a lot of noise goes a long way.

o Kicking dumb articles around is fun.  It 
offers a perspective on just how far afield 
things go because of item 1.

David is right of course.  We've been over 
that ground before.  Just as the HTMLers 
spent time kicking the bejeebers out of the 
SGMLers in the early daze to make a place 
for themselves at the table of the cybergodz, 
now the XMLers are getting kicked around too. 
It's the Web Way. Gotta love this new eCONomy.

"Of course it's rape. Aren't you enjoying it yet?"

What are the -L concerns?

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]

John Dvorak's stock in trade is making provocative statements about
computing so that people can say 'it is pretty dumb and he knows better.'

Sadly, however wrong Dvorak is about specifics, there's frequently some
core truth there, as David Megginson explained so well.

Why is this list getting so hyper-sensitive about any press that suggests
XML isn't perfect?

You might want to take a look at XHTML-L for a bit more perspective on
that.  Not everyone's excited about 'being saved.'  

http://www.egroups.com/group/XHTML-L

Tough and very real questions.