Is XML getting too hard? (was: Re: More on Namespaces...)

[Simon St.Laurent]

James Robertson wrote:
> So I ask: what happened to XML being simple?
> 
> Or to put it another way: if I have to support namespaces, XSL,
> XML-Data (and more) in order to do anything, I'm going back to SGML
> --- it's simpler!

and David Megginson writes:

>If James doesn't need Architectural forms, DSSSL, and HyTime in SGML,
>then he shouldn't need namespaces, XSL, and XML-Data (which seems to
>have been obsoleted by DCD anyway) in XML, unless someone decides to
>start cramming them down all implementors' throats whether they will
>or no.

True - but does anyone else need that stuff either?  Okay, that's going too 
far. But does everyone else need it?  I don't think so.  This train is moving 
too fast, and apparently has no brakes.  I never thought I'd complain about 
standards moving too _quickly_, but XML seems to be breaking new ground in 
many different ways.

Simon St.Laurent
Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)