RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples

["Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pete Cordell [mailto:petexmldev@codalogic.com] 
> Sent: July 4, 2012 06:45
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Cc: Rushforth, Peter; dlee@calldei.com
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore 
> the basic principles of MicroXML"
> 
> On 4 July 2012 11:23, Rushforth, Peter 
> <Peter.Rushforth@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca> wrote:
> > We should do the core set as proposed, because a) they *are* well 
> > known (except for one which needs discussion) and b) it limits the 
> > growth of the xml namespace because combinations can be defined by 
> > authors and put in their own elements.
> 
> I would disagree.  From what I've read here XLink has to all 
> intents and purposes failed.  A few committees may have used 
> it because they have no alternative due to political reasons, 
> but other than that the take up seems minimal.
> 
> The real lesson of the web is that simplicity beats 
> comprehensiveness every time.  If it's simple, people will 
> use it.  If it's too simple people will work around its 
> limitations and enhance it.  Therefore (re-)start with the 
> minimum and build up from experience.
> 
> My vote is for xml:href and xml:src and your done!

Thanks Pete.  I like the vote, but I'm asking for a bit more.

I agree with the keep it simple approach, 100%, hence my repeated reference
to the Rule of Least Power.  But, as I said in my
last email, the simplest thing that could possibly work, would be to copy
the hypermedia affordances that have stood the test of time and gained
adoption on the Web, through html, even though in html, some of them are not well
used, except in forms.  In xml, that will be a different story, I think.

If you put the hypermedia affordances in separate namespaces, that does not solve the problem, only
compounds it, because then vocabularies do not inherit what they may (or may not)
need, and hence have to re-invent them in a namespace.  The problem still 
exists.

Cheers,
Peter