[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
let me see if i got this right -> if i use/write/promote a tool based on a
limited datamodel, i'm threating the future of XML??
or should we be using only XML tools that have no data model, only a
syntactic one? great for processing syntax, not great if you're dealing
with data. and, you know, not only weenie progies deal with data.
if it is the w3c's standardisation activities that worry you, then focus
the discussion on that issue, instead of letting you general
dissatisfaction spill over the whole notion of an XML data model and
anyone who might use or favour it.
regards,
/m
Martin Klang
http://www.o-xml.org - the object-oriented XML programming language
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, W. E. Perry wrote:
> Martin Klang wrote:
>
> > so do you feel that XPath or the data model it relies on compromises full
> > adherence to XML?
>
> Unfortunately, yes, precisely because it is a datamodel which it relies on, rather
> than the specification by syntactic rules which is XML 1.0. It is entirely
> possible for a datamodel to afford full compliance with real (i.e., syntactic)
> XML, though in that case I might wonder why bother to abstract the syntactic
> definition to a datamodel before building tools upon it. The risk which I fear is
> a datamodel divorced from the syntax and eventually not accountable for the
> compliance, at a syntactic level, of tools which rely on it. This is by no means a
> new subject for this list :-). I have swung on that permathread with some
> regularity over the past five years.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Walter Perry
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
|
