[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Inheritance in XML
Jon, Thanks for the info. This is interesting stuff indeed. BTW: I hope you are wrong about good energy being wasted. I at least feel I learned a lot from this discussion. Cheers, Matthew -----Original Message----- From: Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@e...> To: xml-dev@i... <xml-dev@i...> Date: Thursday, April 23, 1998 6:31 AM Subject: Re: Inheritance in XML >I'm generally not able to track discussions like this, fascinating >though they may be, and I make it a firm principle not to become >involved in them, so don't expect any further comments from me >regarding this one. But catching up on my email backlog just now I >see so much good energy being wasted that I can't pass by without >contributing a couple of items of information that may save some >wheel-spinning out there. > >First, allow me to vent just a little bit about a common >misunderstanding. > >[Matthew Gertner:] > >| In last month's Wired, XML made it into the "hype list" with the >| comment that we crazy XML types are kidding ourselves because XML will >| never fly without well-defined semantics. > >This gets the "No [expletive deleted], Sherlock" award for excellence in trade press >reporting. XML was very carefully designed to have no built-in >semantics whatsoever. So considered in isolation, an XML document is >found to have... no semantics! What an insight! > >And we can go further: to give semantics to this thing that was >designed to have no semantics we have to have... it's coming to me, >wait a minute... yes! We have to supply something else that *does* >provide the semantics! Wow! Pulitzer prize time for sure. > >Here are some examples of things that can provide semantics for XML >documents: > >* Scripts or programs. Especially Java programs. :-) > >* Prose descriptions (if you said "DTDs" you are confused, but >understandably so; a lot of good people have been confused about this >before you). The namespace specification provides a standard way to >associate prose descriptions and other bearers of semantic information >with classes of XML documents. > >* Stylesheeets. Especially XSL stylesheets, which are even as we >speak being defined by a very active W3C XSL WG. This is why you will >want to look carefully at the first XSL working draft expected out in >July, because XSL will provide what is intended to be the most >powerful standardized high-level way to associate presentational >semantics with XML documents in publishing environments. Watch this >space: > > http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL > >So people who think that there is something missing from XML are by >and large simply unaware that it was not intended to be used by itself >and that the other pieces are on their way. (There's XLink, too.) >This has all been made abundantly clear in every W3C statement about >the XML activity for the last year and a half, but it's to be expected >that a lot of folks just won't bother to pay attention to stuff like >that. > >Now let's turn to the chief concern of this thread. After a number of >excellent observations about the need for a schema language for XML >documents and the considerations that have to go into the >specification of such a thing, Matthew asks the following question: > >| More tricky than any of these technical issues is the question of >| what, if anything, could be done to promote a mechanism of this >| sort. Obviously this would require a change to the XML spec as >| well as modification to all existing tools which process DTDs, so >| it's a pretty big deal. I wonder if anyone besides me thinks that >| a simple mechanism like this would make sense. If so, is there >| any room in the XML standards process to discuss a change of this >| type at some point in the future (certainly not for XML 1.0)? > >The answer is, Yes, there are other people who think that it would >make sense to design an XML schema mechanism to handle issues like >what has been called "inheritance" in this discussion (not to mention >good old-fashioned data typing). The workings of a W3C committee can >be made public only at the discretion of the chair of the committee, >so I will put on my official XML WG Chairman hat and reveal unto ye >that the XML WG has officially requested that the job of defining a >schema language for XML documents be added to its charter. If >approved by the W3C Director, this work would certainly involve a >consideration of most of the issues raised in this discussion and >would include a close look not only at XML Data but also at other >proposed solutions to the same problem. > >Jon xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
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
|