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

Re: The waterfall model lives?

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: The waterfall model lives?
• From: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
• Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:23:41 -0500
• In-reply-to: <oprkz3uplsezizxn@s...> (Mike Champion's message of"Sat, 22 Feb 2003 09:57:51 -0500")
• References: <1234642.1045878962142.JavaMail.jje@u...><20030222052115.J16255@r...> <oprkz3uplsezizxn@s...>
• User-agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/ Mike Champion <mc@x...> was heard to say:
[...]
| So what if XML were "refactored" so that the bare-bones well-formed
| syntax (and/or data model, that's another issue!) were the common
| core, and DTD processing were at the next layer up?  That would solve
| the J2ME issue, address the high-speed SOAP processing issue,
| standardize the "Common XML Core" that is the rock-solid basis of de
| facto interoperability, and so on.

Yes, I think if the decision is reached that a subset ("kernel" I
called it, stealing the word from Stuart who actually thought of it)
is the right answer, I think it would make editorial sense to refactor
the specs so that they layered as you propose.

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?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

- -- 
Norman.Walsh@S...    | Reason's last step is the recognition that
XML Standards Architect | there are an infinite number of things which
Web Tech. and Standards | are beyond it.--Pascal
Sun Microsystems, Inc.  | 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQE+X9NdOyltUcwYWjsRAgKjAJ9BIMfr4Dmy8lZChK4UPrQIOHGnUQCgoiWF
LX0ScDelrnCRY395gw2EgsM=
=lwxs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The waterfall model lives?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Jon.Ellis@S...
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • The waterfall model lives? (was Re: The subsetting has begun)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: Re: The waterfall model lives? (was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• Next by thread: Re: The waterfall model lives?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread