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

RE: Xml is _not_ self describing

• To: 'Nicolas LEHUEN' <nicolas.lehuen@u...>, 'Elliotte Rusty Harold' <elharo@m...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 12:17:31 -0600

That's easy.  Comment a DTD/Schema and state that by design, 
it must always travel with the instance.  If 
you like, express the comments in several 
programming languages instead of just natural 
language. 

It looks pretty ugly, but hey... it's SGML which BTW, 
was reacted against violently and persuasively 
and that is how we got here:  well-formed and 
well-labeled but a bit more clueless by design.

A label is not a name unless it is meaningful.  
Natural language is not self-describing unless 
you were taught it.  In fact, nothing is. 
Onward and upward to the next part of this 
thread:  Godel (we're past Escher and Bach 
I think).

A schema isn't about self-description or meaning; 
it's about formal controls over possibly informal norms.  

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolas LEHUEN [mailto:nicolas.lehuen@u...]

Separating data from meta-data in a header and body fashion
(a la CSV) could be possible is some cases, but not readable at all (try to
picture it).

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SV: SV: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• Next by Date: Re: SV: SV: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• Previous by thread: Mixed content (correction)
• Next by thread: RE: Xml is _not_ self describing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread