[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word

• From: Paul Prescod <paulp@A...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:10:09 -0700

Tim Bray wrote:
> 
>...
> 
> The original XML recommendation included the specification of
> a constraint language.  This has supported the mistaken belief
> that validation is uniquely special and important among all
> the classes of applications which process XML.

For better or for worse, the emerging XML architecture DOES elevate
schemas, validation and ty*e declarations above other "XML processing
applications". For example SOAP and WSDL implementations use XML schema
types to do type conversions. WSDL actually uses XML Schema as some kind
of abstract type definition system (completely distinct from its use as
an XML validation tool).  XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 are also going to use
information from the schema.

These specifications do not build on XML Schema for its validation
facilities. They do for its t*** system. So flaws in that system will
eventually become material to all XML users. Some future applications
may not deal with element labels (or ulabels) at all. They will deal
with t*** names.
-- 
Take a recipe. Leave a recipe.  
Python Cookbook!  http://www.ActiveState.com/pythoncookbook

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• References:
  • Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why Are Schemas Hard?
• Next by Date: Re: Why Are Schemas Hard?
• Previous by thread: Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
• Next by thread: Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread