[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@jtauber.com>
- To: <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 12:14:57 -0500
> Yes and no. A schema-less XML document is absolutely fine for most
> things. If you need object semantics then you need a schema.
But a schema doesn't tell you the semantics (although certain schema
languages might tell you how certain element types relate to others).
When a human devises FooML, they generally come up with a vocabulary of
labels (perhaps made universally unique via namespaces), a bunch of
syntactic constraints (a schema), some human prose describing what the
labels mean, and maybe some code for doing cool stuff with FooML documents.
(Ultimately the human prose would probably be used by other people to write
code for doing cool stuff, too)
The semantics are in the human prose and the actions the code performs. Not
the schema.
James Tauber
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
