• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Unnecessary decoration (was Re: Stupid Question)
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:55:24 -0800
• In-reply-to: <1015435839.865.7.camel@l...>
• References: <3C863F38.A1DF97A5@p...><3C857FD1.DB1D2EE6@p...><8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E05571575@r.... com><200203060231.g262Vau12882@d...><200203061554.g26Fsvu14989@d...><3C863F38.A1DF97A5@p...>

At 12:30 PM 06/03/02 -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>There seems to be a big gap between design-time usefulness of the PSVI
>and its run-time usefulness.

There seems to be a big gap between the design-time usefulness of
schemas in general and their run-time usefulness. -Tim

• References:
  • Re: Stupid Question (was RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: Stupid Question (was RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: Stupid Question (was RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: Stupid Question (was RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Unnecessary decoration (was Re: Stupid Question)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: What is an XML Document? [Was: Re: canonicalization]
• Next by Date: Email Security ( help!)
• Previous by thread: Unnecessary decoration (was Re: Stupid Question)
• Next by thread: RE: Stupid Question (was RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread