Tim Bray covers a couple of things that are not April Fool's jokes, including XInclude:
Norm Walsh has a densely-technical post showing a nasty problem that’s cropped up in the interaction between XInclude, xml:base, and XML validation. ... in his conclusion, Norm raises a startling point: “I think what pains me most about this situation is that XInclude was in development for just over five years. It went through eleven drafts including three Candidate Recommendations. Why didn’t we notice this until several months after XInclude was a Recommendation? ... it’s only 8,563 words long. If we can’t get a 16 page spec right in three CRs, what hope do we have of getting the XSL/XML Query family of specifications right? By the same metric I used on XInclude, I get just over a half million words (505,779) in those documents. ” Half a million words... pretty scary.
and Binary XML:
The XML Binary Characterization Working Group has issued their final report which recommends (surprise, surprise) that the W3C produce a “Binary XML” specification. Elliotte Rusty Harold nails it. I don’t care if anyone wants to go off and produce their own data interchange format, binary or not, open or not, standardized or not, mapped to XML or not; as long as they don’t call it XML. “Binary XML” is an oxymoron.
Saturday, April 2, 2005
Permalink
Feel free to post a comment below. Please see my comment policy.
Formatting Rules (No HTML):