[sc34wg3] XTM 1.1 issues

[Martin Bryan]

Murray wrote

>In looking at the various changes that have been proposed, I can
say that it's rather unlikely that I'd myself have much use for
the new "XTM", as it doesn't suit many of my own needs and seems
to have processing implications different from and far beyond what 
I've been doing for the past five years with XTM 1.0. I don't 
claim XTM 1.0 is perfect, but what you've been talking about 
doesn't seem to be XTM at all, but some other, new language that 
has only peripheral connections to the work done in 2000, and in 
many cases you've even either changed or invented a different 
descriptive vocabulary than we used then. It certainly doesn't 
look like an "XTM 1.1" anymore, maybe a "XTI", "TMI", "TMDML" or 
something else.

>I think it's time to call your duck a dog, if it barks instead
of quacks.

HyTM :-) 

But then I thought that way about XTM as well :-(

Martin Bryan