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 subsetting has begun

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

This is why the definition of interoperability has to 
be looked at critically as I showed earlier in the 
response to Doug Ransom and in my mail on the TAG list 
to Chris.  

o exchange information - "ability of two or more systems or components 
  to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged [IEEE 90]".

Perry is there.

o request services - "ability of systems to provide services to and accept services from other 
  systems and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively 

Web services are there.

o interchangeable parts -  "be functionally equivalent or interchangeable components of 
  the system or process in which they are used".

I'm not sure if anyone is there if XML 1.0 doesn't define a processor and 
the infoset varies too much among the application languages.  Maybe parsers.


One should decide where along that almost continuum 
one is "interoperating".  Otherwise, saying 
"XML provides interoperability" leads to these 
grinding permathreads and we are kidding ourselves 
about the value of a new subset.


From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]

W. E. Perry scripsit:

> As last week's discussion made clear, such processors are non-conformant to
> the XML Rec. That is the reason de jure not to create documents intended for
> such processors and then call either those documents or those processors
> 'XML'.

Let's not overdo it here.  Such processors are not XML, but the documents
they accept certainly are.


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

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