[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: A multi-step approach on defining object-oriented nature o
> Len wrote: > > That's nuts. No sane vendor requires their production users > to read specifications to figure out why the vendors' products > don't work right, and no experienced manager blames the > specifications. Sure they do. When the problem space is inherently complex, how simple can the solution be? Learning the specifications is part of working in the problem space and organizations everywhere pay hefty bucks to educate their developers towards that end goal. I remember in the early days of MSXML's XPath implementation, you could evaluate an XPath expression without prefixes (e.g., /foo/bar/baz) against a namespace-qualified document (using a default namespace, no prefixes) and it would actually identify the elements. So even though this seemed like "it worked" to the user, it was actually broken wrt to the XPath specification. Microsoft can't simplify the namespace madness without contradicting the layered specifications, annoying the rest of the industry, and being accused of anti-open/standard practices. > They accept the responsibility to fix the problem. That assumes they CAN fix the problem. > Get this through your head: <strong>They Blame Microsoft.</strong> > It is YOUR problem. It's everyone's problem. It would sure be nice to see the W3C take action along these lines. -aaron ................................................... Aaron Skonnard, DevelopMentor (http://skonnard.com) Essential XML Quick Reference now available online! http://www.develop.com/books ..................................................
|
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
|