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

RE: PSVI formalization

• To: 'Jonathan Robie' <jonathan.robie@d...>, 'Elliotte Rusty Harold' <elharo@m...>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: PSVI formalization
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 16:29:32 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

The will to exist may be immanent.  There is no such 
thing as the right to exist.   The metaphor of the 
outlaw allele is that it masquerades as a recognition 
signal and therefore is enabled to reproduce, yet 
does nothing of value for its host.  It exists only 
for itself.   Eventually such become fixed or are 
suppressed by the dominant system.   

Real information (Actual) enables a system user 
to make a choice at a bifurcation point.  Otherwise, 
it is only potential and does not in any meaningful 
sense, exist.  That is rhetoric.  I make no apology for 
it.  Rhetoric has value but the interpreter must 
choose.  Pointy brackets have value but the choice 
is made by others.  Some are more comfortable when 
such choices are made by others perhaps only because 
the choice is made and that bifurcation eliminated 
all other potentials, yet the path is determined.

XML is done.

The fundamental of XML, it's power, is the syntax 
specification.  Ensure that nothing is done to that 
which weds XML to the Infoset.  It is useful to 
code to abstractions; it is useless to store or represent  
information in them. 

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@d...]

Yes, I think that there is a class of applications for which the PSVI is 
where the action is. This is especially true of complex data including some 
data that is strongly typed, and especially true when typed data is stored 
in a persistent form. Some of this persistent data may never be physically 
instantiated as XML.

The "XML as bytes" and "XML as PSVI" camps will both exist for a long time, 
and it's important that the two groups be able to enjoy a red wine together 
in Barcelona. I applaud your initiative to say that both groups have a 
right to exist.

Serialization is important for the PSVI people too. Data, including the 
PSVI, needs to be exchanged. Unfortunately, the current PSVI, though it 
contains all the right data, is a bit of a mess. I would like to see a lot 
of work put into making it useable and redesigning it. The XML Schema 
Formal Description (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-formal/) is a step in 
this direction, but I think there is a lot of work to do here.

I would like to see a "post-processed" XML representation of the 
information found in a schema, a representation that is easy to query using 
an XML language like XQuery. I would like to see a standard API that is 
used in all the language bindings that need access to the PSVI. I would 
like to see mappings into this representation from other schema languages. 
The XML Instances need not be serialized with the entire PSVI, though there 
may be use cases for this. In general, the PSViIcan be computed when the 
instance data is received.

None of this should be imposed on the users of XML who just need text.

Jonathan

• Prev by Date: RE: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: RE: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by thread: RE: PSVI formalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread