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

Re: XML doesn't deserve its "X".

• To: Nicolas LEHUEN <nicolas.lehuen@u...>
• Subject: Re: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 14:59:40 +0100
• Cc: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>,"'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <575CBD83AE7DD411A23500B0D049C2F9C076E5@SRVSOCRATE>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020214

Nicolas LEHUEN wrote:

> That's because extensibility is not something that can be achieved by
> looking at the data only. I'm sorry to ressurect my old rant "meaning is not
> in data alone, it's both in data AND code", but alas, it's still true here.

I wouldn't say that, but rather that the minimum amount of processing 
model hasn't been defined after XML 1.0 and, to stick to my example, 
that Namespaces in XML has not been more directive.

I don't want to bind full applications to XML documents (that would be 
the end of the "late binding" which is the power of XML) but I think 
that nobody has wanted to take the risk of defining any processing model 
for XML after XML 1.0 and that we trying to maintain the scafolding 
which as been built on top of XML 1.0 with the few tools defined by the 
original recommendation!

Eric
-- 
See you in Seattle.
                                        http://knowledgetechnologies.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org      http://4xt.org           http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
    • From: Nicolas LEHUEN <nicolas.lehuen@u...>

• Prev by Date: A very interesting patent related article
• Next by Date: RE: A good case for namespace URIs
• Previous by thread: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Next by thread: Re: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread