[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- To: ",XML-DEV (E-mail)" <xml-dev@xml.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 02:32:49 -0500
Jonathan Robie wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Formal notation is a Good Thing. Readable prose is a Good Thing. But let's
> not pretend that English prose is a precise, formal language.
I don't think that the problem was prose.
Even though I railed against the infoset for being prose-based the
deeper problem with XML 1.0 is that many people explicitly denied the
need for a formal data model. There are still people who think that
ambiguities in the model behind the XML specification are helpful
rather than harmful.
Most W3C specifications still do not have a formal data model. "First
you need to admit that you have a problem."
--
Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself
It's difficult to extract sense from strings, but they're the only
communication coin we can count on.
- http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
