|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The waterfall model lives?
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:23:41 -0500, Norman Walsh <ndw@n...> wrote: > But I wonder how rock-solid the basis actually is. That's the part > that bothers me. If you said "XML Kernel" is XML 1.1 w/o DTDs would > someone come along a week later and say they must have a subset that > doesn't have PIs in it? Or comments? Or attributes? Or #PCDATA? I dunno. > > It seems unlikely, it seems like the task of parsing those things > isn't very onerous. But we said that about 1.0 with DTDs, didn't we? I meant "rock solid" in the sense that applications that depend only on elements, attributes, and text are extremely likely to be interoperable, or portable, or reliable, or whatever one uses to measure "solidity." It's quite true that there's not rock-solid *definition* of the "core" or "kernel" ... e.g. the de-facto SOAP subset excludes PIs and DOCTYPE declarations but XML-SW includes them. And that's before we start talking about namespaces, at which point the former allies start to turn on one another :-) It would be very interesting to analyze the costs and benefits of drawing the line one one side or the other.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








