[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 12:00, Jonathan Robie wrote: > I don't think either of us can simply demand that the other adopt our > position, since neither of us really has the right personality to be > bullied into submission. And I don't think these are axioms that must be > adopted by all specs that are based on XML. I think that both typed access > and untyped access are important for XMl. Exactly! The problem IMO is not that W3C wants to define *a* schema language and *a* query language, but that they want to define *the* schema language and *the* query language. As with programming languages, this long thread shows that there is no universal solution and that diversity is needed. For datatyping, there are many possibilities between static or dymanic typing and between locating type information in models (schemas), instance documents or applications (or transformations or queries). What we need are specifications which acknowledge these possibilities and are interoperable with other specifications which might come from other organizations instead of a specification body acting as the absolute owner of any XML specification and a semi god which can define what is good and what is bad for us :-) ... Eric -- See you in Barcelona. http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/schedule.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
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
|