[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Of course, you realize that short of a mind reader or a sworn affidavit I cannot give you this evidence.
Now if your point is that one should not bandy about claims of bias without 100% proof, I concede that it is a valid point. It would have saved me a lot more time and responses to simply point out the failings and leaps of logic in the article then leave it at that instead of suggesting that given the author's background he probably had some ulterior motive.
As for real refutations, I've pointed out the holes in the article more than once in this thread.
-----Original Message-----
From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
Sent: Mon 9/2/2002 8:22 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Cc:
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] xml schema
At 7:34 AM -0700 9/2/02, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>Many statements in his article indicate his bias[0]. What more do
>you want, a point by point rebuttal in a counter-article on XML.com?
I want specific evidence that the author of this article is biased.
Note that this is quite different than evidence that the author of
the article is wrong. You can be completely unbiased and still wrong.
Absent such evidence, I find the claim of bias to be mere calumny
designed to avoid a real refutation.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
