> *> well-known, but some RFCs such as those on OSPF may be much > *> more vivid if written in XML. There have been quite a few > Vivid? We are talking about deeply complex technical documents > here, not MTV. What do you mean, "vivid"? Maybe, we can display, say, an example of routing information flow, vividly. Putting a hyperlink to a GIF animation in the XML document would works. No MTV required. And I believe it will help the programmers/protocol implementors. Sincerely, Jun-an Gao.
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jorge Amodio
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jun'an Gao
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jun'an Gao
- Re: Why XML is perferable Valdis . Kletnieks
- Why XML is perferable Wang Xianzhu
- RE: Why XML is perferable graham . travers
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jon Crowcroft
- RE: Why XML is perferable graham . travers
- RE: Why XML is perferable Shaw, Robert
- Re: Why XML is perferable Bob Braden
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jun'an Gao
- Re: Why XML is perferable Sean Finn
- Re: Why XML is perferable Harald Alvestrand
- Re: Why XML is perferable Bob Braden
- Re: Why XML is perferable Stephen McHenry
- Re: Why XML is perferable Jon Crowcroft
- Re: Why XML is perferable John Stracke
- Re: Why XML is perferable Ren
- Re: Why XML is perferable Eliot Lear
- Re: Why XML is perferable Scott Brim
- Re: Why XML is perferable Stephen McHenry