[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Is XML 1.0 underspecified? (was: Re: CDATA by any other name...)
[Greg Reynolds] >I would agree we shouldn't be too harsh on the standard as written; the >W3C intentionally does things fast, which is good on the whole, but it >means pragmatism wins out over aesthetics sometimes. But I also agree >using Z would be a very big step forward. > What he said. If the W3C had landed the XML 1.0 in Z or VDM or something we wouldn't have half as many implementations as we currently have. Sure we now need more formalism to ensure that XML goes from strength to strength but without the balance of approachability/formalism XML 1.0 uses we would not have got here. It must also be rememembered that SGML from which XML sprung has very complex interplays between parsing modes, logical and physical structures. Some of this was bound to leak over into XML. </Sean> http://www.python.org The "Swiss Army Laser Beam" of programming languages 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
|