• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:25:13 -0500
• In-reply-to: <1012169788.1804.918.camel@l...>

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."

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generalityof HTTP)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: ANN: XML Origin, the XML Editor & XSLT Debugger Released
• Next by Date: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• Previous by thread: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generalityof HTTP)
• Next by thread: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread