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

RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0

• To: <rjm@z...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• From: "Patrick Garvey" <Patrick.Garvey@t...>
• Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:00:33 -0700
• Thread-index: AcMwe9uWwyM0fY3uT6O7yZi02DVqswAAL14Q
• Thread-topic: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0

I agree. I'm new to this list, and am not terribly grizzled, but I've seen my share of data structures (DB schemas & XML document specs) that I know were slapped together in a rush and show all the adverse effects of that kind of design.

Do people think that standard XML vocabularies are an answer? :-)
 
Patrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Marshall [mailto:rjm@z...]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 5:42 PM
To: xml-dev@l...
Subject: Re:  xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0


On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 10:19, Simon St.Laurent wrote:

> With XML, it's harder and harder to make that separation because the
> tools are growing more and more intertwined.  Using these specs created
> since the rise of W3C XML Schema (or heck, Namespaces at times) requires
> more than an understanding of XML 1.0 + a few reference books - it
> requires a clear understanding of many intertwined things which are not
> themselves particularly clear.
> 
> I can still sort of hand developers XML + a parser and expect something
> good to come of it, but developers looking for anything more than that
> quickly find themselves in strange territory where many things look
> familiar but combine in unusual (and sometimes problematic) ways.  Those
> tools and specifications (especially anything derived from WXS) look at
> the core XML 1.0 information with expectations derived from elsewhere,
> making it more and more difficult to explain the separation of the core
> from the supporting tools.
> 
> On the bright side, reading the Web Services family of specifications
> brings on even more of the same kinds of despair, so it certainly could
> be worse.
> 

Looks to me like the database debates of the 60's/70's. and xml at the
moment is at about the same stage as codasyl etc was then.

..... now all we need is another ted codd .....

rick marshall


-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

• Prev by Date: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by Date: RE: Schema question
• Previous by thread: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by thread: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread