Lists Home |
Date Index |
Is this thread drifting toward a discussion of how
XML infrastructure should evolve to enable component
support below the level of the plugin? IOW, if what
is needed is processors, in effect, MS behaviors
attached through CSS stylesheets work reasonably
well. My opinion at this time is that using
namespaces to infer or direct behaviors is overkill
and more complicated than is needed.
Are we our own worst enemy for the keep it simple
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:email@example.com]
On Wed, 2002-01-23 at 00:53, Mark Baker wrote:
> Re Simon's draft, I have a comment about this sentence;
> "While a list of
> namespaces cannot tell a recipient application everything about the
> use of those namespaces and there interactions in a given document,
> it can provide a baseline understanding."
> I don't think it helps with the "understanding" at all, by itself. You
> need the document's structure to provide the context necessary for
> extracting meaning. Without that context, "all" I think you get is some
> idea of what processors you'll need to process that document. That's an
> important optimization, but it's not "understanding".
I agree, and I'll categorize the use of "understanding" as an
unfortunate accident on my part. Given my general hostility to things
semantic, it is definitely a slip.