Lists Home |
Date Index |
"a compact syntax called ConciseXML that is backward
compatible with XML 1.0"
You might say you could write ConciseXML that is compatiable
but then what is the point of using it? You are just writing valid
Will it display in IE or NS
I doubt (really compatible
Part of the idea of XML was so it could be used for many things.
websites to being used as an important part of the next Longhorn
The file system is based on XML. Office 11 will have document
on XML and I can't see Microsoft including support for it in
IE7. I am
already having problems with the lack of browser support for
don't need to add a XML variation to the already packed
standards pool. Some
of the ideas in it are good but it is not
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, 20 January 2003 05:48
Subject: [xml-dev] XML and ConciseXML
> In case folks think I'm
making this stuff up, I just got
> an email from the InformIT newsletter
that reaches about
> 1 million developers.
> The featured
article is called:
> "Processing XML with Java: Reading XML"
"Reading an XML document is a complicated, error-prone operation.
Elliotte Rusty Harold discusses how to use an XML parser to read the
document for you."
> Here's the URL:
> The first XML
document shown is the following:
> In ConciseXML, it becomes the
> Both forms are expressing the same
> integer returned from a method call.
> XML 1.0
took: 126 characters.
> ConciseXML took: 5 characters.
Isn't there anyone out there who thinks it
> is ridiculous to have a
syntax that uses
> 126 characters to express an integer?
xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription