Subj : XML
To   : Jesper S�rensen
From : Jan Vermeulen
Date : Mon Jan 06 2003 01:40 am

   Quoting Jesper S�rensen on Sun 5 Jan 2003 21:42 to Jan Vermeulen:

js>>> ... but when doing it the other way around the result would lack all
js>>> the "extended" features that the new format otherwise could provide.

JV>>     Really? Would it be so difficult to take a nodelist, transform it
JV>> into XML and then add the extended features?

js> Where would the extended features come from in this case?

       [...]

JV>>     Where would the extended features come from when starting to build
JV>> an XML list to begin with?

js> From the one submitting the data, provided it's submitted using
js> some kind of "extended features aware" system/format.

   So, parallel to the already existinc weekly datastream upwards to the ZCs
we will be treated on a second datastream of XLM scraps and snippets with
reduced coherence, ok?

   This is like having 100 cooks all stirring and spicing the same cauldron of
soup.

   Fidonet is absolutely not ready for that.


   -=<[ JV ]>=-


* Origin: The Poor Man's Workstation -- Wormerveer NL (2:280/100)

You are viewing proxied material from cvs.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.