Please no disinformation on XML

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Sun May 01 2005 - 23:15:21 CDT

> Maybe there are issues that we should schedule further conferences
> about??? We made good progress today, but I'm very concerned about the
> XML question and I think we really need to give people like Rodney (btw
> he represents a signficant segment of opinion out there, its not just
> him that is complaining about the inherent insecurity of XML).

I've yet to hear any "issue" with XML raised that is even COHERENT, let
alone persuasive. If there is some deeply buried idea in there that
actually makes a whit of sense, can you tell me what it is rather than
continually alluding to this mysterious (but unstated)

But again, just to be clear: If it ain't XML, it ain't gonna fly.
IEEE-1622 won't go along. OASIS/EML will not go along. EAC/NIST will
not go along. ISO will not go along. Certifying authorities will not
certify. As a minor footnote, I won't go along as OVC CTO. An
in-house, obscure data format is an absolute non-starter.[*]

Yours, David...

[*] The somewhat weird belief that XML has something to do with
Microsoft is a bit irrelevant. It's 100% wrong on the facts--MS has
been dragged only minimally, kicking-and-screaming, into the world of
XML (which is about common standards, something they hate). But even
if there *had* been some smokey room where an MS rep in dark glasses
pushed for the XML spec, it would make no difference. All the W3C and
OASIS specs are freely reproducible and w/o any known patent
incumbrance. The MS "smoking man" didn't have any effect we care

OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:10 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT