[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] The "Extensible" buzzword (was RE: SchemaTA)
> From: Dylan Walsh [mailto:Dylan.Walsh@K...] <snip/> > My own pet naming peeve is the use of "extensible" in > acronyms, where I > believe "XML" should be used. For example, "eXtensible Stylesheet > Language". XSL isn't really all that "extensible", the "X" > really refers > to "XML". The other example is XHTML. I agree with your sentiments. "Extensible" is overused (check out http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ciq/ciq.shtml for one set of examples). However, I'm not sure I agree with your examples. XSLT allows for extending it's core language with extension elements and functions. XHTML allows for extending the HTML syntax with additional XML constructs not defined by the spec (through modularization). Both XSLT and XHTML provide explicit mechanisms for extension, which seems to fit the definition of "extensible", IMO.
|
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
|