Lists Home |
Date Index |
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> It seems you are punting and saying "this is baggage we inherited from
> other specs so it isn't our fault". This may be true but it doesn't
> change the fact that it makes for a less than perfect data model for
> working with XML.
I am, in fact, saying that any data model that claims to support
namespaces and XML Schema must carry this baggage. We could simplify the
XQuery/XPath/XSLT data model if XML did not come with these features.
In general, I think that our data model does a good job of simplifying
what we inherit from XML Schema. Namespaces ... are tough. I don't know
how we could do better. Do you have any concrete suggestions here?