[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jonathan Robie writes:
> Do a Google search on WXS. It won't get you to the XML Schema
> specification. IT does return lots of different things, some of which
> are related to computers. That means that anybody who doesn't know
> your private vocabulary doesn't necessarily know what you are talking
> about. It seems silly to insist on renaming something with a name
> used primarily on one mailing list, because it doesn't help
> communicate.
Do a Google search on "WXS W3C", "WXS XML", or "WXS Schema", and you'll
get the right answers every time. "WXS" alone works fine at the Cover
Pages, XML.com, and xmlhack.
I'm well aware of the dangers of plugging random acronyms for recently
released specs into general-purpose search engines. That's not exactly a
revelation.
> It's not worth debating endlessly, but I think calling things by
> their name does make it a lot easier for people to know what you are
> talking about.
And creating names which make it sound like this is the one-and-only is
a good way to keep people from considering alternatives, if you can
carry off the hoax.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
