Feeling good about SML

[Don Park]

>As to the question of XML derailing SGML, it simply isn't the 
>case. Our SGML customers are happy to stay where they are,
>secure in the knowledge that they can get to XML in the blink of
>an eye when they need to. XML didn't derail SGML any more than 
>it derailed databases. XML is a facilitating syntax to make your
>data usable by others - if they understand this, I doubt if many
>companies using SGML are the least bit bothered by XML.  Excited
>that they can easily repurpose their data, yes, but not bothered.

Putting aside the justification for SML for a moment, allow me to
replace SGML with XML and XML with SML in your paragraph:

"As to the question of SML derailing XML, it simply isn't the 
case. Our XML customers are happy to stay where they are,
secure in the knowledge that they can get to SML in the blink of
an eye when they need to. SML didn't derail XML any more than 
it derailed SGML. SML is a facilitating syntax to make your
data usable by others - if they understand this, I doubt if many
companies using XML are the least bit bothered by SML.  Excited
that they can easily repurpose their data, yes, but not bothered."

It sounds like a reasonable statement if made 2 years from now.

As far as confusion goes, I think SML can be explained rather
quickly and safely as 'XML 0.5'. <g>

Best,

Don Park    -   mailto:donpark at docuverse.com
Docuverse   -   http://www.docuverse.com


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe 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)