Re: [xml-dev] XML 2 so far

[Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@talsever.com>]

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 18:58:11 -0800, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Making a new version of XML and making it Draconian *again* would 
> truly be tragic.

Making it anything else would be tragic.

There is no equivalent to a browser (single canonical application) and 
a predefined tag set for XML.  In the absence of a well-known tag set 
with well-known semantics (in fact, a well-known schema), anything 
other than draconian is an invitation to revisit HTML circa 1991-96.  
BTDTGTTS.

XML is fundamentally distinct from HTML.  XHTML5 could, conceivably, 
have a single canonical application with lax syntax and error recovery; 
control of the tag set and schema is clearly vested in a group that 
fully intends to maintain strict control.  XML is, by design, 
extensible.  To be so, it has to be more draconian, because there are 
no reasonably imputed semantics for unknown tags (or even for unknown 
attributes).  Specifying "must ignore" could work for some fields.  It 
doesn't for all.

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis                    amyzing {at} talsever.com
And now someone's on the telephone, desperate in his pain; 
someone's on the bathroom floor, doing her cocaine; 
someone's got his finger on the button in some room--
no one can convince me we aren't gluttons for our doom.
                -- Indigo Girls