Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] strange DTD changes

[David M. <da...@lu...>]

On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 12:08:21PM +0200, Martijn van Beers wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 12:01:20AM -0500, Dan Mueth wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Martijn,
> > 
> > I had a similar reluctance to doing away with the beauty and convention of
> > XML and <person>.  The reason why we are currently recommending the form
> > "lo...@us... (Martijn van Beers)" is because that is what
> > is specified by the OMF spec for <creator>.  To quote the spec:
> 
> Hrm, very strange. According to their DTD
> (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/metadata/OMF.dtd) you do
> use <person>. Also, their OMF generation CGI also uses the <person>
> 
> ... After reading some of the omf list archives (and I thought other
> web interfaces to mailing lists were horrid!) ...
> 
> It seems like you guys have assumed the 'spec' to be authorative,
> while they seem to be saying ask. 
> 
> > I'm open to arguments for why we should or should not use the <person> 
> > tag in place of RFC822.
> 
> * XML is a markup language. you mark up things humans understand
>   already, so an application can easily make sense of them too.
>   rfc822 format is not an example of this

I very much agree with this. I think going rfc822 was a mistake, and
would like to see it back the way it was. Keep the XML, well, XML.

-- 
David C. Merrill                         http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                   da...@lu...
Lead Developer                                 http://www.tldp.org

The heart may freeze or it can burn
The pain will ease if I can learn
There is no future
There is no past
I live this moment as my last
There's only us
There's only this
Forget regret
Or life is yours to miss
No other road
No other way
No day but today
	-- RENT