Subj : XML
To   : Jesper Sörensen
From : Jan Vermeulen
Date : Mon Jan 06 2003 01:40 am

    Quoting Jesper Sörensen 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)

.