[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Handheld computers
Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote: > The point here is that standards define minimal interoperabilityt. > The more standards you have to implement for interoperability, the > bigger the problem (i.e. you would be creating an XML that was really > an aggregate of XML+XLink+Xpointer+<whatever>), and that would be > bigger and harder than XML 1.0. Where is the interoperability if there are five different ways to do the same thing? There is strong consensus in the software development world that adding complexity in layers makes more sense than implementing it monolithically. There might be a case for keeping ID and IDREF, for example, as a minimal mechanism for linking inside a document, but many of the features of XML (notably entities) are pretty complex in their own right. An architecture that does away with these, significantly reducing the complexity of implementing "vanilla" XML, and requires implementation of (say) an additional XLink layer for applications that need to create references between documents, would seem to me to provide more, not less interoperability. Matthew 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe 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
|