[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: "Christopher R. Maden" <crism@lexica.net>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 08:16:55 -0500
There was also the introduction of dependence on
reserved words such as XML and processing instructions
(the XML declaration which isn't one but looks like one
and smells like one) which had been avoided in the
SGML Way where possible. Some systems did make liberal
use of them. Some systems such as Oster introduced
dot naming to infer classes as well. Support for the
SGML Declaration varied. Many XMLers don't know that
is there just as many HTMLers weren't aware of the
DOCTYPE.
A lot of the competition in markup systems
happens in the application languages (aka vocabularies),
not in the meta language. That was just as true for
SGML. Domain boundaries are hard to keep stable which
is why some doubt a reliable semantic web is achievable
but for the same reason meta-domain services become
important and the reliability and quality of these,
critical.
Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
|