[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
And Len (live but incompletely formed) and Lewis (still dead but completely well-formed) probably agree. The difficulty is knowing when a Value among a set of values is to be a floating point value without doing a lot of rules or other kinds of processing to work that out *For Every Instance of the The Same Kind of Document*. Nodes are local but they receive lots of different values and it is a good thing to know when one arrives just how to cast it. It is also nice to do that sooner rather than later in some cases. The Schema appears to be an easy way to do that. The nice thing about the name having meaning is that the egg has to be handled delicately or the maintenance costs of Kings' Men and Horses goes up. A priori agreements citable by some public citation are rather good for that. Leaving it to "programmer's discretion" in all cases is usually a really bad idea. Simple looks good until you have to put the egg back together again and the only instructions you have are the crease angles in the breakage. The issue is whether or not PSVI is required in every case. Certainly Humpty Dumpty is allowed to be the Master of his own fall but not his reconstruction. Otherwise, all the king's horse and all the king's men might fail and the king can't afford that. Record of authority governance of the transaction ensures the cost is commensurate with the means. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: W. E. Perry [mailto:wperry@f...] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 1:28 PM To: XML DEV Subject: Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema "Simon St.Laurent" wrote: > I'm coming more and more to the opinion that the only semantics which matter > in the end are the semantics seen by the recipient of the message. With all deference to Len Bullard and Lewis Carroll: in the end this must be so because the recipient has the obligation to make some use of the message. The only use which he can predictably make is one for which he is locally capable. Even if the message arrives burdened with data schemata, content models and canonical semantics which the recipient has pledged to honor, in the end he must instantiate the 'true' data, or semantics, or meaning of the message as whatever it is that he is specifically capable of using, presumably by processing it to some locally meaningful outcome. I am merely suggesting that the recipient be permitted to proceed directly from the XML syntax as received to the locally meaningful instantiation of locally useful data, by whatever means are locally at his disposal.
|
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
|