Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Apr 11, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> The improper use of an 'XML' label is a fair concern. On the other
> hand, its use, qualified so as to indicate that it is something
> different or additional, is a signal that something is working to
> maintain a majority of semantics and idioms of XML.
Sigh, I think of "XML" as the whole bloody mess -- syntax, data models,
APIs, query languages, whatnot. I agree that adding additional
qualifiers is the best way to be specific in a context that requires a
distinction, e.g. "XML 1.x syntax" or "XQuery data model."
I realize that some people are quite firmly of the opinion that "XML"
means "XML 1.x syntax", and that "binary XML" is an oxymoron. By that
definition, however, XSLT, DOM/JDOM, and XQuery are not "XML"
technologies. That seems doomed to cause far more schims within the
XML community and confusion in the world outside XML geekdom than any
increase in semantic precision would gain anyone. I'm comfortable
saying that XML is sortof a trinity -- "one technology in three
persons" : syntax, data model, manipulation language -- but recognize
that these are essentially vague and interdependent concepts that will
probably never be clarified to anyone's satisfaction. Likewise, there
are alternatives on any one axis so long as one doesn't get too far
away from the middle on all axes as once. A bit uncertain, perhaps,
but such is life.
[As an aside in honor of the holiday today: The challenge of defining
the Trinity apparently keeps certain people occupied fighting the
numerous heresies still today.
http://apologetics.johndepoe.com/trinityfalse.html is the top Google
hit for "trinity heresies" and contains the fascinating tidbit that
those who believe that the Trinity is one Being in three persons are
orthodox, but those who believe that it is one person with three ways
of working are guilty of the Modalist heresy. I remember a college
history teacher who had a bit of fun tripping up the professed
Christians in the class with their inability to distinguish the
Revealed Truth from the various historical heresies. "Sorry, you would
have been burned at the stake for holding that opinion." I wonder if
the believers in the Revealed Truth in the class remember that session
as clearly as I do 30 years later...]