[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
We're talking specifications for standard technology
here, not innovations for new technology. If one
considers SOAP innovative, there is an impedance
mismatch to the specification they are applying.
The main argument for the subset is the perceived
danger of subsets growing in the wild. Whether or
not this is a real or an imagined danger has not
yet been established. If this danger is real,
I expect the subset to be something close to
what TB has described in the SW plus something
to accomodate the know id problem, eg,
extending the xml: reserved namespace.
And the death of DTDs. I suspect the real
angst starts there.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org]
<religious-analogy-beaten-into-the-ground> IMHO, It's time for
ecumenicalism, not fundamentalism ... time to welcome innovators into the
mainstream rather than driving them out as heretics ... time to accept the
fact that XML is continually evolving from what survives in the real world,
not invented by an omniscient Creator. </religious-analogy-beaten-into-the-
ground>
|
