RE: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)

[Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>]

> Perhaps what we need for a schema language is something along the lines of
>   <schema>
>      <conceptual-model>
>     ...
>      </conceptual-model>
>      <language-binding>
>     ...
>      </language-binding>
>   </schema>

Not a bad idea... bind a taxonomy or ontology onto a language 
binding. It would take reasoning/arguing about intended semantics
one level higher into the metaphysical instead of the merely
physical.

Of course, this is closely related to machine translation, etc.etc.