[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> [WS folks] chose XML, and they have
> concommitantly also chosen to " violate the fundamental design of XML". It's
> that simple.
And what parts of the fundamental design are being violated? DTD's?
It seems to me that saying WS don't use DTD's and in exchange network
messages can now be manipulated with the same tools as the rest of
the XML toolbox is a pretty cool thing. It's an excellent tradeoff
to avoid a return to IIOP RMI etc.
> If you want to put forth such a vacuous accusations as "XML
> 1.x is not composable as specified"
A freestanding XML document cannot contain another freestanding XML document.
I would think that even "markup" would find that useful -- I could have
a standalone essay that gets incorporated into a book, e.g.
Personally, I don't care, since some kind of packaging or attachment
capability gets around that limitation, and I think that meets the 80/20
rule.
/r$
|
