xml-dev - Re: [xml-dev] Unnecessary decoration (was Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question)

Re: [xml-dev] Unnecessary decoration (was Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Unnecessary decoration (was Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question)
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:55:24 -0800
In-reply-to: <1015435839.865.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <3C863F38.A1DF97A5@prescod.net><3C857FD1.DB1D2EE6@prescod.net><8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E05571575@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft. com><200203060231.g262Vau12882@dragon.flightlab.com><200203061554.g26Fsvu14989@dragon.flightlab.com><3C863F38.A1DF97A5@prescod.net>

At 12:30 PM 06/03/02 -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>There seems to be a big gap between design-time usefulness of the PSVI
>and its run-time usefulness.

There seems to be a big gap between the design-time usefulness of
schemas in general and their run-time usefulness. -Tim

References:
- Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question (was RE: [xml-dev] XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
  - From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question (was RE: [xml-dev] XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
  - From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question (was RE: [xml-dev] XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
  - From: Joe English <jenglish@flightlab.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question (was RE: [xml-dev] XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
  - From: Joe English <jenglish@flightlab.com>
- Unnecessary decoration (was Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question)
  - From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [xml-dev] Re: What is an XML Document? [Was: Re: [xml-dev] canonicalization]
Next by Date: Email Security ( help!)
Previous by thread: Unnecessary decoration (was Re: [xml-dev] Stupid Question)
Next by thread: RE: [xml-dev] Stupid Question (was RE: [xml-dev] XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread