RE: [xml-dev] ten years later, time to repeat it?

[Len Bullard <len.bullard@uai.com>]

Amazing how that works out.  I'd love to have a few shekels for every time I
was beat over the head about the MCM.  But like attributes, they seem to be
a natural feature of the way we organize information even if an illogical
one.

You might be right about the users, but the systems implementers would
notice PDQ.  How would you like to rewrite Visual Studio?

len (evil geniuses for a better tomorrow)


From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com] 
 
Len Bullard wrote:
> In those days, while the sites that did use SGML were quite large and
housed
> mission critical data and were mostly in the US.  Today we have a problem
> identifying what the most significant uses of XML are and where the
> significant uses of XML are.  The ones we do know about, on the other
hand,
> are spread all the way across the planet.

Remember that I'm only talking about a clean subsetting.  And, to be 
honest, I suspect 90% or more of users wouldn't notice even if their XML 
parser was mysteriously replaced with a parser that only took the subset.

Sure, it's difficult, though.

 > <pointedTroll>
 > Are you actually DEFENDING the Mixed Content model, Simon?
 > </pointedTroll>

It's the only place where I see XML as having a significant advantage 
over JSON or YAML, so yes, I suppose that constitutes a defense.

And heck, 97% of my work involves mixed content of some sort or another.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.