[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Data Model(s) for XML 1.0 / XML Devcon / DOM / XSL / Query
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:29:17 -0600
"I'll have you know I voted _for_ devolution, so there :-)!"
And all they gave you was an old rock they took without asking.
How long do you think it would take to get a complete
infoSet done so we can move on? The long loopbacks
are costly but will be moreso if something isn't done.
Polishing an old chair waiting for the rock for
few centuries is a drain on the castle staff.
Firmer ground is needed but Perry isn't
wrong about keeping XML 1.0, essentially just syntax.
"Well-formedness" (separation of parse and validation,
James Clark's words) really is the original thing that
XML has brought to this party and that has
enabled a lot of progress. If we are going to
talk about the "is-ness" of an "XML document", I don't
want to throw out the good parts. Humans do
still have to read this stuff. I don't care if
the only bit they read is the stuff inside
the pointy brackets; I do care if the implementation
hides stuff they need to know is there. Namespaces
have been painful because of that.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h