[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: is that a fork in the road?
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 16:24:46 -0600
Who is offering what indigestible chunk?
Henry? He is saying what the best and brightest
said before him and since: we are getting a
complex mess because we didn't have a robust
data model to begin with. Which part of that
is unreal? All I am asking which I think
may be at the heart of this is do we have
to loop back into the base infoSet to fix
things. The pipeline metaphor can be
seen as a series of infosets, each one
different but building on what came before.
Is that the idea? If the idea is to remove
the bedrock of well-formedness, only the
bits on the wire have to right to begin with,
then I agree. At the bottom of this, all
one gets is a well-formed character string.
That won't be enough for some applications.
The rounds in VRML proved it to me. Justin
makes it clear as Marrin did before him
that type information is a REQUIREMENT for
these apps to interoperate blindly.
If you are talking about XML Query, the
jury is out on that. I can see the sense
of it from a perspective of how relational
guys like to write queries. I can see some
giant overlaps with XPath and the expressions.
I also see Jonathan saying over and over that
both spec owners are working on a convergence
to avoid messiness. And I see them reiterating
what Henry says so clearly: without a data model
it only gets worse from here.
So I am really missing your point. Change seems
inevitable. Will it be ad hoc or planned?
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:email@example.com]
Really? Whose follow-on requirements? And why does that require
fundamental change to the original "job" that may seriously injure those of
us whose requirements were met quite well already?
Why drive the "follow-on" stuff so deeply into specs those of us with
simpler needs may have to use?
That minimal victory "bites" a digestible chunk, rather than the huge and
dense mass currently offered for universal consumption.