RE: XML Blueberry (non-ASCII name characters in Japan)

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

Precisely.  That was the cost of simpler for less 
power.  SGML was designed for this kind of problem.

However, it also seems to me that the issues of 
smaller fielded systems (eg, the problems of IBM, 
the problems of smaller language communities) belong 
to the international standards organizations.  The 
W3C recommendations are part of a body of work 
for commerce at large.  I realize just how fuzzy 
and even controversial that position might be, 
but Elliotte is asking the right questions with 
regards to cost and support.

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

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


-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:


> Or one could say as some seem to be that XML is not
> the commons.  It is a product wholly owned by a 
> consortium with its own customers and requirements. 


Shhhh.

> Why not push Blueberry off to SGML?   
> Bigger kids; bigger car.  Real commons. 
> That would make it ISO's problem.

There wouldn't be anything to do: just write yourself a new SGML
declaration, that's all.  It's because the SGMLDECL is
hard-coded in XML that this kind of change control
is required.