[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Or it could be a reference to one of the original markup approaches,
GenCode.
Sometimes it means coding as independently as possible of any particular
application processor, and that as Joe shows, can become very trivial.
Without opening a permathread:
o XML imposes no semantics past the minor ones of the attributed data
types,
some processor behaviors for reporting syntax constructs, and the xml:
reserved bits
o Semantics are imposed by the implementor of a processor of content for
which the vocabulary designer provides labels and structure.
Past that, XML simply does not care.
So:
No markup is ever generic in the language sense of being unintentional.
You choose the labels to mean what you mean and you have to communicate
that meaning or you have to leave the interpretation to the receiver.
You can as Tim Bray says, Dare to Do Less, and by that, impose as few
of your own intentions as possible on the data, but you have to understand
the limits of XML itself are quite severe so that the limits of its
application
can be as few as possible. How widely those limits are shared and the means
of sharing them are entirely up to you.
len
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
Perhaps it means something like this excerpt that may hold data from an
electronic form, for example (or a screen):
<fields>
<field>blah blah blah</field>
<field>blah blah blah</field>
<field>blah blah blah</field>
</fields>
As opposed to
<CustomerInformation>
<FirstName>John</FirstName>
<MiddleInitial>Q</MiddleInitial>
<LastName>Public</LastName>
etc.
</CustomerInformation>
|
