At 07:57 10/05/2003 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
>Arjun Ray wrote:
>>Dave Pawson <> wrote:
>>| <grin/> AF was suggested in the corridor too... or at least AF without
>>| the baggage (needs a jargon free re-write perhaps?).
>>I don't think jargon is much of a bar to grokking AFs
>
>I disagree. While I still dislike the AF attribute remapping syntax, I
>think there was a whole complex of great ideas lurking in there that
>failed to succeed because the language used to describe them was more or
>less completely impenetrable.
Thanks Tim. Glad I'm not the only one.
I still haven't met a document that says 'why' AF's.
They do this or that for you.
With todays tools (heck it wasn't that long ago was it?) perhaps the how
might be easier,
once the why and what are clearer?
Dummies guide to AF' anyone?
regards DaveP
