OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] SGML complexity

SGML:definition 2.1.1 expression 1-ambiguous if its markings E' denotes no 
two words uxv and uyw where x not = y and x (unmarked) = y (unmarked), how 
does that fit into xml?  Does this definition fit into xml.

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Tei wrote:

> I think is usefull to describe XML, XSLT and SGML as standard protocols.
> Because the social implications of a standard protocol is working onthis mail list.
> There are people that query  "You can do [xyz] with [protocol]", thensome guy A answer "Yes". And then some guy B answer "Maybe, but use[propietary extension, new lenguaje, etc] instead".After that,  a war betwen  A and B tryiing to [win].
> Thats threads are long, usefull, and because all people post in thecorrect thread, is easy to ignore by people not interested. Yetanother reason to read this beatifull mail list.
> I want to highlight two facts: - A is [smart, or maybe a genius]. He can do [xyz] with [protocol]and maybe is a good idea, but most normal people are unallowed tofigure out how to convulate [protocol] to make [xyz], mostly becauseat first [xyz] seems imposible. - Fighting against standar protocols are like fighting the tide withsand castles. Is naïve, fun and doomed.
> Of course, half my facts say "Apply [XYZ]" and half facts say "Avoid[XYZ]". And this why people discuss, because both sides have goodpoints.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS