RE: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Using a label as a bracket seems to be overkill.  LISP.
Using a URN as a bracket seems to be overkill.  XML.

Insisting the label has meaning says the 
label names a type (and the relational theorists 
guffaw at the markup theorists).

Using the word proudly because without it, 
this thread just becomes obscure.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@rpbourret.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:22 AM
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word


Tim Bray wrote:
> Since
> nobody is arguing that it's a bad idea to have context-sensitive
> content models,

Actually, I have, at least half-heartedly. Part of my objection is the
expense of figuring out what content model applies, but most of it is
that I would like a label to tell me what something *is*. (This is
different from what something *applies to*, which usually is
context-sensitive.) On the other hand, the cases put forward both by the
OO community (Matthew, me) and the well-formed community (Evan) are good
use cases.

My gut reaction to this sort of fence sitting is to not support it and
add it later if there is demand. (Along these same lines, the best
hiring advice I ever heard was that if you only think a candidate can do
the job but are not really sure, don't hire them -- you'll almost
invariably regret it.)

-- Ron

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>