xml-dev - Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility

Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
From: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:39:26 -0500
In-reply-to: <3E2870E4.7030409@emory.edu>
References: <r01050400-1023-D9101B0A2A4311D781E20003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]><005c01c2be52$5d2fbac0$6aa8a8c0@cictr.com><15912.19711.574153.278553@megginson.com><3E2870E4.7030409@emory.edu>

Patrick Durusau writes:

 > > XML (generic), Extensible Markup Language
 > 
 > Don't take this as legal advice or even accurate facts. Any "official" 
 > types for the W3C care to comment?

I've been off the committees for a few years now, so you'll need
someone more recent to bring us up to date.  Has the W3C abandoned its
trademark of XML?

All the best,

David

-- 
David Megginson, david@megginson.com, http://www.megginson.com/

References:
- Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax
  - From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
  - From: "Mike Plusch" <mplusch@clearmethods.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
  - From: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
  - From: Patrick Durusau <pdurusau@emory.edu>

Prev by Date: RE: [xml-dev] Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: [xml-dev] more pate nt fun
Next by Date: RE: [xml-dev] Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: [xml-dev] more pate nt fun
Previous by thread: Re: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
Next by thread: RE: [xml-dev] ConciseXML syntax and compatibility
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread