So far no one has introduced a virus through IADS. However they manage
it, as hedges go, it's sturdier than any web browser. It's usefulness
is a question of cost and deployment strategies. We keep up some creaky
architecture to make these mil-std deliverables.
HTML can do the job for IETMs and print. That's the point. As I said a
while back, the problem of the IETMDB was delivering it at all. If you
want to derive multiple deliverables from a single document db, it has
to be created but creating it in XML is not the most cost effective way
to do it. It's a pretty good way to archive it with enough
documentation. I repeat what I said in Atlanta: IETMs are a problem
that is either too difficult to solve or too profitable. At least in
the case of IADS, it isn't a development cost.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:] On Behalf Of John Cowan
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 11:30 AM
To: Len Bullard
Cc: Betty Harvey; Rick Jelliffe;
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] RE: Formatting Processing Instructions
Len Bullard scripsit:
> The PDFs spit out of the B and C standards are almost identical to
> vanilla HTML layouts so the claims aren't as justifiable as they once
> were with the exception that having your own code base is still the
> best security hedge.
That's like saying that having your own encryption algorithm is the best
security hedge: it's true only if your organization is second to none in
code maintenance or cryptography, as the case may be.
