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

Re: A Plea for Schemas

• From: uche.ogbuji@f...
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 09:44:18 -0700

Tim Bray:
> > [...]  I think large parts of the the 
> > "communal understanding" live in wetware between human ears and in messy
> > procedural code.

Richard Lanyon:
> Which is why, parenthetically, it's often quite awkward to process XML
> using a declarative, rather than procedural, language.

Eh, what?  This seems a blatant non-sequitur.  The fact that much legacy code 
is procedural is a historical accident and has nothing to do with present and 
future XML-processing.

To some minds, and for some purposes, procedural approaches are awkward: in 
other cases declarative approaches are awkward, but if one had to pick one 
with intrinsically less "awkwardness" for XML-processing, I would argue for 
the declarative approach.

-- 
Uche Ogbuji
FourThought LLC, IT Consultants
uche.ogbuji@f...	(970)481-0805
Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets
http://FourThought.com		http://OpenTechnology.org



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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: A Plea for Schemas
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@i...>

• References:
  • Re: A Plea for Schemas
    • From: Richard Lanyon <rgl@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: A Plea for Schemas
• Next by Date: Re: a newbie question
• Previous by thread: Re: A Plea for Schemas
• Next by thread: Re: A Plea for Schemas
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread