From: "James Britt (rubydev)" <james@...>
Date: 2001-11-23T13:20:28+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:26191] Re: Conformance Test of XML Parsers in Ruby(20011122)

Actually, that only popped into my head *after* I sent the message.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Menard [mailto:jimm@io.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 1:56 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML; undisclosed-recipients:
> Subject: [ruby-talk:26177] Re: Conformance Test of XML Parsers in
> Ruby(20011122)
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> "James Britt (rubydev)" <james@rubyxml.com> writes:
> 
> > What the larger application accepted was XML, and what it emitted was XML, but there isn't a good name for the 
> markup/data while in
> > that middle processing stage.  Perhaps it's a problem of terminology; there's no such thing as "almost XML".  But "almost XML"
> > processors can be very useful.  What do you call them? What do you call the stuff they handle?
> 
> Not Quite XML? (http://www.io.com/~jimm/downloads/nqxml/)
> 
> Jim
> -- 
> Jim Menard, jimm@io.com, http://www.io.com/~jimm/
> As a math major, I don't have to be able to add -- I just have to be able
> to PROVE that I can add.
> 
>