Re: [xml-dev] Wikipedia on XML

[rjelliffe@allette.com.au]

> But you're here talking about versioning as an after-thought in order
> to fix legacy problems. If the versioning model was in place from the
> get go, perhaps this would have worked perfectly. I myself use a
> similar scheme, and it works for rather large and complex systems that
> use XML as a pipeline language.

Yes, if everyone had perfect foreknowledge, we would not have any
problems. And yes, if someone else has a problem we don't have, it is not
a real problem.

But I agree that having a worked out versioning system where the
subset/superset relationship between minor and major versions was made
explicit and could be coded for is good advice for old and new schemas.

But just imagine, if we dare, a world which where people didn't know
everything in advance, where there was risk from failure of the technology
and where it was the job of technology to try to cope with this! The best
made plans, etc.

In such a world, cruise ships would have life rafts, cars would have air
bags, and supermarkets would double-bag heavy items in case they split. Of
course, this is such a mad vision it is unrecognizeable. XML is Titanic!
Sorry for the sarcasm, it is probably not constructive. I feel like
Professor Claven explaining the theoretical "3rd" dimension to the
Simpsons.

When there is a breaking change to a vocabulary (and schemas), and a
namespace change is forced, how do we minimize the impact and make it as
undisruptive as possible to running and deployed systems?

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe