[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] re: The relentless march of abstraction
Dave Winer writes: > Just the first few paragraphs opened my eyes to where the process is going > with XML. I never understood what "infoset" was all about. Now that I do, I > don't get why the W3C has to get involved in it at all. I've always felt > that schema are only needed if you're storing XML content in a relational > database ... Unless this is a deliberate non-sequitur, the article must have misrepresented the Infoset pretty horribly. The Infoset is just a minimum common data model that other XML-based specs can count on having available from applications (i.e. every spec can count on information about elements and attributes being available). Of course, it came along after the fact, so much of its work was actually rationalizing stuff that was already out there, but Infoset is in no way a schema spec. I agree that schemas of all kinds are far, far overrated. They're useful as authoring templates and for pre-release Q.A., but otherwise they give a false sense of security, like air bags (at best) and introduce enormous performance and security problems (at worst). > I know I irritate the powerful people Who are these powerful people? Most of the members of this list don't have the power to fire anyone else on the list or to make anyone else on the list rich. Tim Berners-Lee has the power to veto W3C specs, for whatever that's worth, and Tim Bray has the power to make the foolish wither and dry up under his occasional irony, but that's about as far as anyone can go. All the best, David -- David Megginson david@m... http://www.megginson.com/
|
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
|