Lists Home |
Date Index |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
/ John Cowan <email@example.com> was heard to say:
| Again, the mere *provision* of typing metadata does not prevent such reuse.
| However, if *standard tools* assume that the metadata is sound, then
| transgressive reuse may indeed be made difficult. Obviously, purely lexical
| tools are not affected, but tools based on XQuery/XPath2/XSLT2 will not
| be purely lexical in this sense (whereas XPath1/XSLT1 are).
Taking the specific case of XQuery/XPath2/XSLT2, I'm not sure I see
the problem. Given
<foo n="1">Network Drive</foo>
I might write a template that matches those elements in a purely
I might also write a template that matches them based on some data
type (forgive the psuedo-xsl, the standards are still fluid as you
<xsl:template match="*[type() = my:AddressType]">...</xsl:template>
The latter case seems to be exactly what Walter Perry described in an
earlier message on this thread: a particular view of the data in a local
context (I wrote the query that way because I expect to interpret the
darned thing as an address).
Imposing my view on the data for my query doesn't seem to do any harm.
Or are you concerned that I'm going to slurp up the XML, interpret it
according to my local context, shove it into some database somewhere
with those interpretations and thereafter be unable to view it with a
different local context?
Some people are going to do that, I suppose, to bend XML to the will
of their databases. But I'm not going to do that (that would be
stupid, IMHO, but I'm not trying to build a system that processes a
zillion purchase orders a minute, either). I haven't perceived anyone
threatening to force me to do that. Am I insufficiently paranoid?
Or have I missed the point?
Be seeing you,
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM | Throughout history the world has been laid
XML Standards Architect | waste to ensure the triumph of conceptions
Web Tech. and Standards | that are now as dead as the men that died for
Sun Microsystems, Inc. | them.--Henry De Montherlant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----