[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
rob@koberg.com (Robert Koberg) writes:
>Doesn't the fact that someone (elharo, I never know how to address
>these people who use 3 names...) came out so strong in favor of
>something they have never implemented or never seen implemented give
>anybody pause?
No. Not at all, actually. These things frequently are less complicated
than the grizzled veterans who've spent too long on their own paths
complain. The path he's proposing has less junk in the way than a lot
of other approaches.
(I also wrote a book on Cookies, so please don't question my credentials
as well.)
>It seems strange to me that he clearly declared his (untested) way was
>correct and the people who actually need/use a certain way for
>real-life business purposes are so
>wrong/ignorant/immature-in-the-ways-of-the-web.
If you can't stand a challenge to your "real-life business purposes",
what exactly are you doing here?
>It is also interesting that when he implemented it his site broke...
And have you noticed the reports coming in that it does in fact work?
Wow. This posting, which wasn't even targeted at my arguments, made me
angrier than anything in a long time on xml-dev. That's an impressive
accomplishment, Robert.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
