Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Alaric B. Snell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Ahah! Now I understand!
> This support for hiding meaningful information in comments where no schema
> can mandate it is a bid by the infoset-haters to discredit anything that
> transports infosets! :-)
Actually, I think it reflects a hoary and practical guideline common when doing
text processing in organic stages: "never throw anything entirely away". For example,
to prefer commenting sections out rather than deleting them. (In XML we
only have comments to do this, in its predecessor so-horrible-it-cannot-be-named-
among-civilized-folk-lest-the-mewling-infants-turn-green we could mark sections
I suppose that if schemas were written to support a <crap> tag, people could use
that for much the same purpose, but they don't: and standards committees are usually
about how to say some information is interesting, not how to say some information
is probably uninteresting, so I don't foresee an OASIS group to standardize <crap>.
Perhaps it could be taken on by some existing working group in some organization
with a suitable track record.