Great controversies of XML
simonstl at simonstl.com
Fri Jan 14 00:46:56 GMT 2000
At 03:09 PM 1/13/00 -0800, Andrew Layman wrote:
>Maybe Namespaces should occupy the top five slots. :-)
#1 was originally Namespaces, Namespaces, Namespaces, but I thought maybe
that was a little harsh. But maybe not!
David Megginson wrote:
>verbosity (binary formats and compression), mixed
>content, schema/DTD repositories, comments, processing instructions,
>character encodings, data typing, document and schema composition, the
>single root element, required end tags, packaging multi-part
>documents, etc. etc.
Er, uh, yeah. That's a fine list. I was thinking a little more in terms
of using XML than what went in the spec (otherwise I'd include notations
and unparsed entities), but that's got lots.
I wish I was better at coming up with nice phrases like 'data kidnap' and
'data lockout' to keep up with Rick Jelliffe, but we're off to a fine start!
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
More information about the Xml-dev