Re: Re: Why XML

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:05:48 +0100, Tim Meadowcroft wrote
It sounds like if SPF is going to use XML, there needs to be defined an
XML subset that all records have to adhere to.  But of course, then it's
not really XML anymore.


XML with SPF is about marketing - and a subset of XML is good enough for
the marketing purposes.

Lars.

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
RE: Why XML, terry Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch Re: Re: Why XML, Roger Moser Re: Re: Why XML, Tim Meadowcroft Re: Re: Why XML, Aredridel Re: Re: Why XML, Jon Kyme Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck Re: Re: Why XML, Lars B. Dybdahl <= Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck Re: Re: Why XML, Lars Dybdahl Re: Re: Why XML, Andy Bakun Re: Why XML, Douglas Otis Re: Why XML, Matthew Elvey Re: Why XML, Douglas Otis Re: Why XML, Matthew Elvey Let's stop discussing XML (Was: Why XML), wayne Re: Why XML, Douglas Otis RE: RE: Why XML, Ryan Malayter

Previous by Date:	Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck
Next by Date:	Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck
Previous by Thread:	Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck
Next by Thread:	Re: Re: Why XML, David Brodbeck
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]