On 4/9/13 5:09 PM, Fraser Goffin wrote:
>> That qualifies as a neat reversal of polarity.
>
> Not at all. I, and others never claimed that the primary use case for
> XML schema is for validation.
Did I say that validation was the heart of the problem? Not exactly. I
said that schemas cause more harm than benefit. I attacked the use of
schemas for agreement, and pointed out the perpetual temptation they
offer to build brittle schema-centered applications. Validation is one
small piece of that much larger puzzle, and not an especially useful piece.
I'm not sure what I think of John's polarity reversal, but I think I can
grant that it is at least a slightly less toxic use case than many
others. There's LD50, and there are non-lethal toxic effects, many of
them cumulative and unnoticed.
> Perhaps you just assumed that along with
> a few other things. Take the time to listen and consider, you might
> just find out something that will help your Basilage talk go all the
> better.
Thanks for the condescension - it is indeed useful fuel for getting the
paper written.
Thanks,
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
