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

RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming

• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:24:19 -0500

But stamping it out is just as bad.  You want to profile it.
That preserves options for global applications while reducing 
options for local applications to get a profile 
that matches your reduced needs for the features of XML that 
you don't want, like, or don't need for your applications.

Again:

XML1.0 = Core
CORE + (anything to the right of the plus, eg, namespaces)

Yes, I realize that people want namespaces in core.  It's 
a bad idea and if these threads don't get that across 
clearly, people aren't listening.  There is a lot of 
basic work that can be done that never touches namespaces. 
The core should be the absolute smallest set of features 
that guarantee global interoperability.

What you are left with is a need to be able to state when 
your system is only using core or some other profile.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

At 12:43 PM 8/2/2002 -0400, Mike Champion wrote:
>I wouldn't say that bums like you should be thrown out, but perhaps
>you would be happier breathing new life into the SGML world than
>in laying down in front of the PSVI/WXS/XQuery logging trucks that are
>"despoiling" the XML world.

Nope.  The SGML perspective comes with an incredible truckload of options 
requiring prior agreement for interop, the very things I've been trying to 
stamp out in XML.

I'm happy to be ecumenical about "markup", but I don't think the things the 
programmers are introducing begin to qualify as good markup.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>
  • Re: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Next by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (wasRE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Previous by thread: RE: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
• Next by thread: Re: Programming for Markup vs. Markup for Programming
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread