XML.orgXML.org
FOCUS AREAS |XML-DEV |XML.org DAILY NEWSLINK |REGISTRY |RESOURCES |ABOUT
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] choosing sides

Michael Sokolov wrote:
>> Do you think there is enough in your proposal to make, for example,
>> some of the major players, build a parser and other tools to support
>> it Michael?
>> 
> Good question, Dave - I guess my thought that was smaller change would be *easier* to get implemented, but perhaps that is naive: ho-humness could doom it.  One thing I like about this incremental approach though is that much of the benefit can be realized *only* with a new parser.  I know a parser is complicated, but with some of the complexity removed, it would actually be much simpler to create a new one.

However, I don't see anything in your proposal that reduces complexity. More features and "looser" interpretation of the data makes parsers more complicated, not less. 
-- 
Chris Burdess



[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