Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML

Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML
From: "Robert Koberg" <rob@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:30:19 -0700
what??? I know what it means and you are using incorrectly.

First, I don't see any mention of it in the US constitution or amendments.
Second, how can a company formed a few years ago (relative to nobility
standards) be set to this "standard"?

hmmmm... Even if you consider MS nobility and it has an obligation to
society, shouldn't it concentrate on feeding the poor and starving? Sheesshh

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Garfield" <lgarfiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: Microsoft XML

> > -----Original Message-----
> > > Ironically, Microsoft has a unique duty, one that they all too
> > frequently
> > > fail to do.
> > it sucks that Microsoft has to think about how not to get sued by the
> > governement from every direction --
> That's the price of being a monopoly, especially when you got there
> illegal anti-competitive means.  Look up the phrase "noblesse oblige."  It
> originally applied to people, but it works for companies, too.
>  XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread