[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- To: xml-dev@xml.org
- Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 20:51:46 -0500
I think the poster was right. Groves are neat but
essentially are just one more of a set of formal
means for rigorously defining an encoding. Not that
that is a trivial capability, but certainly not a
mysterious one. I am surprised, given what I
read in the schema primer and the SOAP spec
that groves hasn't been adopted. It seems that
SOAP depends heavily on schema for its own
definitions. The question is, are those definitions
are strong as the ones produced using groves?
len
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************
|
