Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Urrrrp! No. It is the smaller corporations who have to be strict because they have a lot fewer resources for negotiating out what is signal and what is noise. John Cowan is right for the mainstream. It isn't about big vs small; it is about what can be afforded. If my XML experts can't negotiate the instances, we have to rely on the DTD or Schema. If they can negotiate the DTD or Schema, I can afford to ship only well-formed. Do I have to rely on their code as the contract for all the instances? Be careful of replying in the affirmative to the last one, because if you do, you have made Microsoft's case and given AOL only one way to go from here. len -----Original Message----- From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...] 1/27/2002 5:16:27 PM, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> wrote: > At the syntactical level - only ship well-formed content > if you call it XML - I'm happy to agree completely. > > Above that, there's lots and lots of room for disagreement. I agree with Simon. For example, my canonical example of an order; if you want to stay in business, you'll be liberal in the vocabulary and structure you accept so long as it is well-formed and the information you need to process and validate it (in the business sense, not the XML sense) is in there somewhere. Nobody but a handful of mega-corps will be able to get away with saying "if you want to do business with us, you need to use our schemata."
|
