Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!shelby.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: Brian Palmer <bpal...@rescomp.Stanford.EDU>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: why Common Lisp is not a lisp
Date: 09 Sep 2003 07:36:40 -0700
Organization: Stanford University, CA, USA
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <0whk78iowp3.fsf@rescomp.Stanford.EDU>
References: <vl530j6kgdh055@corp.supernews.com> <3F52AB1C.4050200@nyc.rr.com> <xcvu17w2pn1.fsf@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU> <3F53BCC4.1080405@nyc.rr.com> <sfwr82zxa46.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <87brtupfsd.fsf@optushome.com.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rescomp.stanford.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.Stanford.EDU 1063118200 24600 171.64.136.254 (9 Sep 2003 14:36:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@news.stanford.edu
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code)

Alain Picard <apicard+die-spammer-...@optushome.com.au> writes:
 
> Yeah, right.  So now, they send XMS in ASCII down the pipes
> and everyone has their favorite translators.  Much faster
> than CORBA, I'm sure.   :-(

XML, I assume you mean? One of XML's selling points is that it's not
an ASCII only medium; XML processors are required to support both
UTF-8 and UTF-16, and many support others. 
-- 
I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard.