Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: MikeDacon@aol.com
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 15:44:59 EST
I'm fairly new to this list but have had some experience with
implementing XML applications. Having recently written a short
introductory training course on XML, I have a few comments on
the XML 1.0 specification.
First, overall, I think the XML 1.0 specification is usable and fairly
clear. I do not have enough experience yet to point out serious
ambiguities or omissions in it. Although, like any product, these types
of things often must be resolved through widespread dissemination and
Having said the above, I do have a few suggestions:
1. While there are some examples in the spec, there should be an example
for every topic. Consistency here is important.
2. The ordering of information seems haphazard. I don't understand the
design of the current ordering - it just seems to try and cover all the topics
without regard to logical flow or a building block approach.
3. The complexity of all topics is not equal, although in the current spec you
feel as if they are treated as such. Topics known to be more complex
should provide extra examples and more in-depth explanation.
After having said the above, one could argue that these suggestions should
be taken by book authors and not the specification authors. While that may
be the case, these suggestions would make the specs better server their
Michael C. Daconta
Author of C++ Pointers and Dynamic Memory Management
Sun Certified Java Programmer and Developer
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)