OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] The waterfall model lives? (was Re: [xml-dev] The subsetti

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

From: "Mike Champion" <mc@xegesis.org>

> So what if XML were "refactored" so that the bare-bones well-formed syntax 
> (and/or data model, that's another issue!) were the common core, and DTD 
> processing were at the next layer up

Because it would not solve a basic problem (the same one that is endemic to any
post-processing model where the post-processing is not strict) that the user may end up 
with a different information soup (i.e. the things available for Bill Perry to select his 
information set out of)  than the one the sender wants them to receive.

The other examples are XML Schemas, XInclude, and (because SAX only tells you 
whether a document is standalone after you have already selected whether to use
a validating parser or not) DTDs. 

At WWW7 I gave a little talk that we need to have a general mechanism for linking/binding
resources to elements/types/names ahead of getting a specific schema language; the 
opposing Microsoft guy took the opposite side that because one schema language was 
all that anyone would ever need, a more general mechanism was a waste of time.  

Merely splitting up a technology isnt layering: for layering to work every layer must have a
mechanism to allow the next layer to be invoked or to fail if it is unavailable (as the default

Rick Jelliffe


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS