[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: intertwined specs
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Michael Rys <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:26:00 -0600
"MSL should not be exposed in its pure form. The problem with the schema
spec is that it only defines validation behaviour. This is not sufficient
for operational semantics and type systems as required by a query language.
MSL should address this and in addition give a formal foundation for the
validation. So the only way you should get in contact with MSL is by using
formally correct validators and query systems that provide you with support
Ok. I understand the weakness in the Schema. As for MSL, just hide it from
the production staff beneath
tools such as "validators" and "query systems" and we are kosher.
"Let me add that simple means conceptually simple (ala KISS and clean) and
not simple-minded or simplistic. A formal system may be simple but still
needs a deeper understanding of the theory to fully understand it."
To understand deeply yes; to apply no.
To apply, simple means quick to learn,
easy to do, results vary by practice.
I have this memory of trying to get writers who
had seen early WYSIWYG to accept FOSIs.
Formal elegance is no substitute for getting
home by 5PM on Friday... which I gotta do now
before the next line of storms rolls in.
Y'all have a good weekend.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h