Handheld computers

[Paul Prescod]

> These features increase
> complexity without adding significant value and only found their way
> into XML in the first place because certain vested interests wanted them
> to ease the migration path from SGML to XML.

Even if you are right that those features do not add significant value
(and various people would debate you about any particular one of them),
it is hardly fair to propose XLink and schemas as replacements when they
were hardly gleams in our eyes three years ago. Most of XML's extra
features went in not because of established interests but rather because
they were known solutions to known problems and we did not have the
courage to presume that solutions would become readily available. The
millenium approaches and it turns out that the solutions still do not
exist in standardized forms. Both XLink and schemas are still in the lab
and both groups are trying desperately to REDUCE their responsibility
for replacing existing XML features, not INCREASE it.

-- 
 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself
"Like most religious texts, the XML 1.0 spec has proven itself 
internally-inconsistent, so we're going to have to invent some kind of 
exegetical method now to show how it's really all an allegory." - Anon


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)