May I just add here that of all the things we've talked about in these threads, 
perhaps the only thing that will still be in use a hundred years from now will 
be Unicode. إن شاء الله

On Apr 29, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Alexander Johannesen wrote:

> However, I'd like to add here that I happen to love XML, even from an
> integration perspective, but maybe that stems from understanding all
> those tedious bits no one really cares about about it, like id(s) and
> refid(s) (and all the indexing goodness that comes from it), canonical
> datasets, character sets and Unicode, all that schema craziness
> (including Schematron and RelaxNG), XPath and XQuery (and all the
> sub-standards), XSLT and so on. I love it all, and not because of the
> generic simplicity itself (simple in the default mode of operation, I
> might add), but because of a) modeling advantages, b)
> cross-environment language and schema support, and c) ease of
> creation. (I don't like how easy well-formedness breaks, though. That
> sucks)

Eric Hellman
President, Gluejar, Inc.
41 Watchung Plaza, #132
Montclair, NJ 07042

Reply via email to