[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
- From: "W. E. Perry" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: XML DEV <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:28:22 -0500
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> I'm coming more and more to the opinion that the only semantics which matter
> in the end are the semantics seen by the recipient of the message.
With all deference to Len Bullard and Lewis Carroll: in the end this must be
so because the recipient has the obligation to make some use of the message.
The only use which he can predictably make is one for which he is locally
capable. Even if the message arrives burdened with data schemata, content
models and canonical semantics which the recipient has pledged to honor, in the
end he must instantiate the 'true' data, or semantics, or meaning of the
message as whatever it is that he is specifically capable of using, presumably
by processing it to some locally meaningful outcome. I am merely suggesting
that the recipient be permitted to proceed directly from the XML syntax as
received to the locally meaningful instantiation of locally useful data, by
whatever means are locally at his disposal.