|
| | | Altova Mailing List Archives>Archive Index >xml-dev Archive Home >Recent entries >Thread Prev - RE: [xml-dev] Common Word Processing Format [Thread Next] RE: [xml-dev] Common Word Processing FormatTo: Michael Champion <michael.champion@-------.---> Date: 12/3/2005 12:41:00 AM On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 08:45 -0800, Michael Champion wrote:
> >From: Uche Ogbuji <Uche.Ogbuji@f...>
> >
> >Thank GODDESS for the OO XML project, Microsoft's partially reformed
> >Office XML format team, and all others who are saving us from the abject
> >horror of having to contemplate XHTML as an office file format.
> >
> >Are you kidding me?
> >
> >All arguments for XHTML everywhere eventually boil down to arguments
> >that rather than
> >
> ><monty>
> > <python/>
> ></monty>
> >
> >I should write:
> >
> ><div class="monty">
> > <span class="python"/>
> ></div class"monty">
> >
>
> A somewhat more realistic example would be, in some off-the-top-of-my-head
> approximation of XHTML, DocBood, and ODF:
>
> <head>
> <title>The Meaning of Life</>
> <div class="monty">
> <span class="python"/>
> <p> Always look on the bright side of XML ...</p>
> </div class"monty">
When you say "a more realistic example" it makes me think you're also
conflating my arguments w.r.t. custom XML versus my arguments w.r.t.
Office XML formats. I expanded from the narrower argument to the
broader one, and this "correction in realism" of yours really doesn't
correspond to any point I was interested in making.
A more realistic example? Simplified from something I ran into
consulting for a client today?
<product>
<feature primary="yes">
<summary>mixed content prose here</summary>
<benefit>mixed content prose here</feature>
<complements ref="urn:uuid:111-222-333"/>
</feature>
</product>
I'm sorry, but I am not about to see that translated to protean-XHTML-GI
form, and I suspect if I proposed such to my client, they'd think I'd
cracked.
> >And when I hear people preaching that people should stop writing new XML
> >vocabularies, I just wonder who's been passing out the XHTML
> >+Atom-is-all-you-need Kool-Aid.
>
> Tim Bray http://2005.xmlconference.org/program/wednesday#5
Yep. I saw that, rolled my eyes, and moved on. Sorry, but I'll
continue creating new XML vocabularies, thank you very much, and I'll
encourage everyone else to do so as long as they've done simple
common-sense analysis.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://fourthought.com
http://copia.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org
Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/ | |
| | ||||||||
| Company | Legal | Press | Partners | Careers | Sitemap | Contact Us | Altova Blog | Mobile | Full Site | |||
|
