[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: participating communities (was XML Blueberry)
- From: Tom Bradford <email@example.com>
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:48:48 -0700
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> If there are thousands of Ethiopian or Burmese or Khmer speakers clamoring to write markup in their native script, then the change would have large advantages that might be worth the cost. On the other hand, if there are a few dozen native speakers who think it might be nice to have this, but who are probably going to use Docbook and XHTML 99% of the time anyway, then I don't think the advantages are big enough. I honestly don't know where the truth lies. I do know the costs of the update will be huge. I am not willing to assume the advantages are so big they outweigh the costs until proven otherwise.
There are people who, when lost in the woods, will resort to eating
grubs and berries, and drinking out of puddles. They do it because they
have to, not because they want to. I'm sure if you put them back in
their house and give them the choice of grubs and berries or filet
mignon, they're going to choose the filet. If they don't, they're
either vegans or crazy.
The point I'm making is that many people outside of our self-centered
universe would like to use tools tailored to their specific needs, but
have no other choice than to make due with what's available. Why are we
sitting here arguing whether or not people should have a choice? The
answer is obvious.
If we're going to break anything, let's break it now while the pain
threshhold is still relatively low, and while we still have the option
of breaking it.