[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: An open plea to the W3C (was Re: XInclude vs SAX vs validatio n)
- From: Daniel Veillard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:16:39 -0400
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 02:11:42PM -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2001 13:13:32 -0400, Champion, Mike wrote:
> > The default solution is to keep piling on the complexity until W3C process
> > collapses under its weight (arguably, it already has!), and then let someone
> > else come along and carve "Java" our of our "C++". I hope that we can be
> > more pro-active and do what needs to be done before 20:20 hindsight makes it
> > obvious what SHOULD have been done.
> I figure the "default solution" will happen eventually - I just worry
> about the interval between the pile-up and the carving.
> That, and lots of people still use C++ and many of them bear the scars.
And the few who have attempted to run on an Os and Base libraries which
were not pure C are not even here anymore to speak about it. Proof that
people may completely loose objectivity when they think they hold the truth.
And as far as I can tell those Os and libraries are still the most reused
pieces of code ever (maybe with some Fortran math libraries which have been
around for 20+ years).
Of course if the goal is to make a maximum of money on consulting jobs
or teaching courses Java is very very effective it seems.
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
firstname.lastname@example.org | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/