RE: [xml-dev] Re: determining ID-ness in XML

[Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@propylon.com>]

At 11:14 24/11/2001 +0000, Michael Kay wrote:
> > It seems people on this list live in different universes. All
> > around me
> > I see XML that is as proprietary to particular vendors as their
> > native "binary" notations where. I see the open systems *spirit* that
> > is implicit in XML jettisoned while the *syntax* of XML - the only
> > thing explicit in the standard - is used to create new proprietary
> > notations.
>
>What are you trying to say, Sean? That no-one should be allowed to design
>and use their own XML vocabularies unless TimBL first signs it off as
>approved?

Of course not.

I am arguing for a data model for XML. There is no
conflict between having a data model for XML - so that we all know
what the parsing *layers* do and emit - and having user defined
vocabularies!


>In that case you've missed the point. The whole success of XML is that it
>standardizes the protocol stack up to layer six while still allowing
>infinite variety at layer seven for consenting parties to exchange any
>information they like.

Layer six! I presume you are talking about the ISO 7 layered model
of computer commmunication services and protocols. I don't
see that XML has much to do with layers 1 to 5 so I don't see
how XML can claim a success here.

regards,
Sean