[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
ricko@allette.com.au (Rick Jelliffe) writes:
>Simeon and Wadler do a good service by characterizing XML+WXS=PSVI
>deficiencies, but they waste their bullet by pointing their gun at
>"XML". (I hope nothing in my comments shows any disrespect to them or
>the body of their paper!)
You're too respectful, Rick. I'd say that paper is not only not "the
essence of XML", it has practically nothing to do with XML whatsoever.
Statements like this one just make me laugh at how far off the mark the
paper is:
>From the external representation one should be able to derive the
>corresponding internal representation.
This claim seems violently counter-intuitive for markup systems based on
text, especially if there is any interest in exchange among dissimilar
users across organizational boundaries or over time.
These gentlemen may be brilliant, no doubt, but they seem to ask
questions which have only coincidental intersections with XML and then
boldly title their paper "The Essence of XML". Maybe they should call
it "the Essence of Hierarchical Data-Modeling" and work back to an XML
representation later. If we're really lucky, they'll create a new
format that solves all of these problems instead of using XML.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
