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

RE: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)

• To: 'Uche Ogbuji' <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Subject: RE: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 13:31:37 -0500
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>

I'd say that without such modularity, the questions of 
what level of tool support is required are difficult to 
answer or are not configurable  In some cases as Simon notes, costs 
will be passed to users who don't need the features they 
are paying for.  

My POV is formed by reading RFPs day in and day out, 
and bidding a system that enables us to turn off unrequested 
features on delivery, then turn them on if and when the 
customer says, "I want that and here is a purchase order." 
It isn't the philosophy or the techical requirements that 
drive that; it is precisely the business case.

Jonathan said "use cases" and he is right.  The data 
typing tech has value but not all the time and in 
every case.  Simon and Jonathan are both right. 
The problem, as pointed out, is that the specs 
don't account for it.  Are the costs significant 
such that this has to be fixed?  For that, without 
use cases, it is argumentative.

len

From: Uche Ogbuji [mailto:uche.ogbuji@f...]

> Yep.  Don't build system dependencies into the core.
> 
> On the other hand, can someone authoritatively say 
> what is core and what is a system profile for XML?

<snip reason="to keep the email censor at bay" />

But there is certainly room for common sense here.  As much as I find RDF I would be out of my skull to suggest mixing it into the core of XML.  I would have hoped for such restraint from the application-specific data typing folks.  I have no doubt they find their wizardry useful, and I'll even admit it is useful to me at times, but the whole is served better with proper modularity.

• Prev by Date: RE: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea for XUpdate...
• Next by Date: Is XML-REST more scalable than SOAP?
• Previous by thread: RE: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)
• Next by thread: RE: XPath 1.5? (was RE: typing and markup)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread