[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XML 1.0 is simple. was: RE: almost four years ago....
- From: David Brownell <email@example.com>
- To: Jonathan Borden <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:42:54 -0700
> From: "Jonathan Borden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Perhaps we should stop talking about the family of specs surrounding XML as
> if they _are_ XML itself. That is to say, defining "XML in totality" is akin
> to defining binary logic (simple) and defining the latest multiGHz Pentium
> IV with a gazillion gates _as_ part of "binary logic in totality".
I've talked about "XML" and "Greater XML" ... most folk can understand
that, by analogy to cities: "Boston" is much more approachable than "the
Greater Boston Metropolitan Area". Is there a better metaphor to hand?
The problem is that marketing organizations need to undermine such clear
distinctions, otherwise they can't leverage the PR about XML (it's good)
to imply that their XML-ish thing ("XML in silicon!") must also be good,
at least not without doing real work.