On 11/15/13 11:42 AM, David Sheets wrote:
>> After you.
>
> This is evasive. You have submitted a claim that this SO issue as an
> "XML WTF" which is attributable to a type discipline. If you do not
> defend your claim, we cannot rationally accept it.
>
> Further, you made the claim that "XML is not designed for nodes". If
> you are unwilling to defend this claim, it, too, must be rejected.
The history is on Uche's side. If you want to claim that XML has a data
model, that it was "designed for nodes", you have a lot of revisionism
to do.
> Are you interested in developing actual, useful theories or simply
> wasting everyone's time?
Indeed.
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
