RE: Steve Ballmer is cracking up

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

Correct.  XML is just a syntax.  Schemas at 
the next level lock in vocabularies.  Then 
come the semantics of the process.  For .NET 
to work, XML must work As Specified.  Even 
if he has some illusion of poobahness, his 
own code won't work interoperably without 
that.  MS is just as much internally tied 
to the spec (intramurally) as we are.

But that is the game we are all playing.  

For me, today, the most important issue 
is the functionality of MSXML 4.n because 
the food chain starts there.  True for me, 
and probably a few gazillion others.  Like 
it or not, one of the most helpful things 
one can do for XML In General right now 
is test and proof that dll because a LOT 
of schemas and semantics will be built 
over it.  For example, all tests performed 
so far says the current beta doesn't support 
<unique>.  That's one.  Others?  We have to 
find out because we are racing to build 
schemas as fast as we can.  Schemas are 
the worms that make the spice and as the 
Guilder said:

"The spice must flow."

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

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean.mcgrath@propylon.com]

I used to think that big guys would play embrace and extend with
their XML parsers but this was very stupid of me. The only game in
town is to fall over yourself in your efforts to conform to the
W3C standards because a) the real money is further up the food
chain and b) beaming about your standards compliance deflects
attention from where the real action is.