|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XSet, an XML Property Set, was: re: Why the Infoset?
At 11:00 AM 8/2/00 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: >2. "Groves and property sets are overbuilt." Possibly >but I don't have a good feel for this. It seems to me >the same thing said about SGML lead to HTML and XML. >Half a decade later some slowly realize that HTML >was too underbuilt and XML is slowly reacquiring most >of the concepts of SGML. My intuition is that simple >requirements everyone can understand tend to be less >robust than the problems a few can. It sounds elitist but >the reality is one of experience over expectation. In some ways I'm deeply sympathetic to groves, but in other ways I'm definitely not. It seems wonderful to me to define a model that can be applied to pretty much any data source, including legacy data sources that don't look at all like XML. On the other hand, I'm not sure that project does anything good for XML itself, which is pretty much my criterion for what is appropriate to XML-oriented specs. Similarly, URIs are wonderful things, but I don't think their larger capabilities - beyond absolute URLs used to _locate_ things - have been good for XML. I suspect that using groves to define an Infoset for XML would be great for groves, but I'm not sure it would do anything good for XML. If that means reinventing the wheel periodically, well, there seem to be a lot of wheels in need of periodic reinvention... Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








