Namespaces, schemas, and scholasticism (was RE: Namespaces, sch emas,Simon's filters.)

["Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>]

> 
> >Right or wrong, that's what the spec says. So either XML 
> Schema is wrong, or XML Namespaces is wrong.
> 
> No, it's just that the term "element type" as used in the namespaces
> spec does not mean the same as the type of an element in the XML
> Schema sense.



I've been trying to remember what this thread reminds me of ... then it
occurred to me: Medieval theology.

From http://www.encyclopedia.com/printablenew/11569.html

"scholasticism, philosophy and theology of Western Christendom in the Middle
Ages.The beginning of scholasticism can be identified in the methods used by
civil and canon lawyers of the 11th and 12th cent. to reconcile seemingly
contradictory statements." 

from http://members.aol.com/Philosdog/Scholasticism.html

"The disputes [the Scholastics] entered into often seem like pedantic
hairsplitting, futile word games, or even downright incomprehensible
nonsense to most everyone today. Scholasticism thus has a deservedly "bad
name", and has been continuously and justly ridiculed ever since Rabelais
first did so in the 
1500's. One of the favorite things to ridicule is the supposed debate among
the
Scholastics on the question of "How many angels can dance on the head of a
pin?"...

And in fact, some of the Scholastics, such as Aquinas, did dance quite 
close to the precise question, as this little taste from his "Summa 
Theologiae" shows:
Q. 52, a. 3 - "Whether Several Angels Can Be At The Same Time In the 
    Same Place? There are not two angels in the same place. The reason
    for this is because it is impossible for two complete causes to be
    immediately the causes of one and the same thing. This is evident in
    every class of causes. For there is one proximate form of one thing,
    and there is one proximate mover, although there may be several remote
    movers. Nor can it be objected that several individuals may row a boat,
    since no one of them is a perfect mover, because no one man's strength
    is sufficient for moving the boat; the fact is rather that all together
    are as one mover, in so far as their united powers all combine in
    producing the one movement. Hence, since the angel is said to be in one
    place by the fact that his power touches the place immediately by way
    of a perfect container, as was said (Q. 52, a. 1) there can be but one
    angel in one place."  "



And guess who drove the last nail into the coffin of Scholasticism?  Our old
friend William of Occam, they guy whose philosophy of minimalism is
enshrined as "Occam's Razor", and who some credit with setting the stage for
the Renaissance by separating questions of faith from issues that can be
addressed by reason.  

Perhaps there's a message for the XML world here ...