[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: And the DTD says, "I'm NOT dead yet!!"
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Norman Walsh <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 13:27:57 -0600
Citation correction only: that quoted
text did not originate from email@example.com
or other addresses axiomatically associated
with Bullard, Claude L (Len). It originates
from an article cited by said named entity.
(Hey, obsfuscation is fun and profitable!)
Otherwise, the animosity is the procedural
side effect of misunderstanding the
SGML Way, purported to mean, complete
separation of process and data/format
and content. It is just another heresy by
interpreters of the ancient texts.
Enabling and determining are different means.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Norman Walsh [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
/ "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com> was heard to say:
| In other words, elements, attributes and namespaces are here to stay,
| whereas DTDs, entities and PIs are transitional, and are on the way out.
I've never understood the animosity expressed against processing