[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 12:54 PM 5/7/2002 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 12:36, Jonathan Robie wrote:
> > So far, I really feel like we are discussing various people's philosophies
> > of XML. The requirements for XQuery were based on use cases, not on
> philosophy.
>
>Right, Jonathan. Every use case (except maybe update) should be
>considered critical and spared from possible trauma of any possible
>philosophical or aesthetic objection. The committee obviously has the
>best priorities for which cases matter. Notions of what markup is
>actually good at should have absolutely nothing to do with decisions
>about how to use markup.
Simon, I invited you to specify use cases and sample queries from our
documents which you feel illustrate features that are not needed. We did
this on the committee, and we published our use cases publicly, with a link
to a public feedback list.
I am not asking you to bless every decision we have made. I am asking you
to give feedback at a concrete level so that I have something specific
enough to respond to. I mentioned the use cases because this is a document
we produced to allow you, the user, to respond to us and tell us whether we
were on the right track. If you think there is a better way to get
concrete, use whatever approach you want.
I don't know how to design a language that will avoid any possible
philosophical or aesthetic objections on XML-Dev. I'm an engineer, not a
deity. But if you give me a concrete problem to solve, I think we have a
Working Group that might be able to solve it.
Jonathan
|
