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

Re: syntax, model

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: syntax, model
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
• In-reply-to: <r02000200-1028-7845750605A911D888600003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>

--- "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> wrote:

> 
> Thanks, but sharing data models remains something
> that sounds great but
> is deeply pernicious when examined closely.

You're "sharing data models", at least in the sense
that John Cowan uses the term, whenever you use
XPath/XSLT or XQuery ... or WikiML or something like
it to edit some text that will get converted to XML
... or DOM or CSS to work with a non well-formed HTML
page.  That's what bugs me about Tim's rather sweeping
assertion in the TAG list.  

I can't reconcile the idea that shared data models are
"non-interoperable" or "pernicious" with the real,
practical success of XSLT, DOM, CSS, etc. Likewise, I
don't see much merit in the argument that the very
real warts on these things have to do with their being
defined on a reference data model rather than concrete
syntax.

On the other hand, if we mean something very different
by "data model" in the abstract sense of the XPath
data model and in the specific sense of some model of
an order or invoice or a syndication feed or whatever,
that may explain a lot of the angst surrounding this
issue. 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: syntax, model
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • Re: syntax, model
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: syntax, model
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: syntax, model
• Next by Date: Re: syntax, model
• Previous by thread: Re: syntax, model
• Next by thread: Re: syntax, model
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread