Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: ??? (was RE: A simple guy with a simple problem)
 No. Simple is good. Too simple for safety is bad. Knowing which is which is the trick. DTDs? Schemas? How do you know when what is simple for you is too simple for the next guy? How do you know that what Henry proposes isn't precisely what is needed for that guy to get his job done? We can't treat XML spec work as an XP programming exercise. There isn't enough room in front of the screen for everyone involved to sit down and write the unit tests. Daring to do less is still a dare. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 3:36 PM To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); xml-dev@l... Subject: RE: ??? (was RE: A simple guy with a simple problem) To the extent that you're making a distinction between technology appropriate for use in prototyping systems and technology appropriate in production systems, you have a point. Pushing that any further as a point about 'simplicity' (something you genuinely seem to dislike, if not consider downright impossible), particularly as it might be relevant to XML document structures, seems stretched at best, inappropriate at worst. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
