Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
- From: David Lyon <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 22:13:56 -0500
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.email@example.com>
- User-agent: KMail/1.7.1
I was reading this article...
so everything is looking good for an xml 2.0... with datatyping
and other good stuff...
if you need a hand in any way I'd be happy to help. Obviously
the W3C is interested in pushing ahead with some fundimental
improvements in xml despite some of the reverse comments
that get posted on the list. "To every great development there
is usually profound resistance." it's true it seems...
Maybe there is a public face that tells the Australians they're
not wanted, and then in private, the ideas are taken off and
tested and found to be sound.
I'm interested to see where all this goes, and to see what sort
of integrity is in place at the W3C. In terms of recognition of
When people say "it's easy to come up with something more
efficient than XML 1.0" it's not true. It takes years. What might
look like such a simple way of tagging data, ie
actually involves a lot of work. Writing parsers, testing, doing
and this is probably just the start of things that I could add to
the xml knowledgebase.....
the whole field of distributed grid based xml is something that
I may present seeing how things go with this stuff.....
I have a lot of cool xml toys. I'm happy to share but we'll
just have to see to what degree the original inventors names
need to be erased from the technology simply because they
have sand on their feet..