[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Yep. Or those that like to roll their own at every step
of use of the XML, or those that have alternatives (eg,
different schema systems). On the other hand, I quite
like the ability to check value spaces and to use
XML Schema to specify them. It is a proven way to control
distributed loosely coupled developers and as a means
to authoritatively reference a requirement.
But Simon asks a pertinent point: who bears the costs
for unused features? The developer? The framework
developer? This becomes a nasty problem for buying
and using tools.
XML 1.0 is core. The skunkworks document is a good
proposition for what gets used most often, XPath and
XSLT are great tools, but XML 1.0 is core. I consider
everything else including namespaces and DOM as system
features, good for those that need them and yes, vital
for most successes, but not core. At the root, XML is
just a syntax with an optional validation language (the
DTD).
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@datadirect-technologies.com]
I suspect much of this argument is between people who merely use XML as a
transport and serialization technology, and those who actually do
processing of XML that involves some knowledge of the types involved.
|
