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

RE: bohemians, gentry

• To: 'Jeff Lowery' <jlowery@s...>
• Subject: RE: bohemians, gentry
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:06:55 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

I'm not sure I get that.  You seem to be 
suggesting that the issue is as I suggested 
to Jonathan, one of creating requirements 
by reference.  Yes? 

***The struggle here is as it is on the issue 
of subsetting:  what features are to be 
required of XML processors and which 
specification(s) govern that.***

I highly recommend a reading of Paul Grosso's 
post to www-tag@w... 
as titled "XML-* [was: ... XML subsetting...]".

It is always possible for the application language 
designer to do as SOAP did and point out 
precisely which features of the language an application 
should not use.  That changes nothing.   It seems 
to me that unless xml datatype support is required 
at the XML processor, that changes nothing.  It's impact 
via references from other specifications (say XQuery) 
is substantial but possibly unavoidable unless that 
specification is also profiled. My experience is that 
lots of profiles in a family of specifications reduces 
interoperability severely.  

The critical issue is that an XML 1.0 compliant processor 
be able to process XML, not extra-XML specs.   The problem of datatypes 
is in expecting that processor to handle non-1.0 
features.  Yes?  If one side wants more features 
(say, the datatype supporters) and one side wants 
a refactoring (the XML-SW supporters), that is 
a real technical conflict, not just political. 
There are politics here but they seem to be the usual 
ones of opposing views about what should be done with 
XML Core.

Yes, either path leads to disenfranchisement.  That 
is why some want no changes to XML 1.0.  In other 
words, can anyone here tell me what the benefits 
of refactoring XML 1.0 would be?   And if there is 
no notion of supporting datatypes in the XML processor, 
what problem there is?

If there is confusion about what to do, do nothing. 

len

From: Jeff Lowery [mailto:jlowery@s...]

There are times when the personal interests of those who hold the reins of
power conflict with the interest of those subordinate.  There is a power
stuggle here, although I'm starting to think it's not between data-heads and
doc-heads, nor between pedants and free-thinkers. I think it's fundamentally
and issue of representation and perceived disenfranchisement of the
majority.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: bohemians, gentry
    • From: "Andrzej Jan Taramina" <andrzej@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: bohemians, gentry
• Next by Date: RE: Is there a technical issue?
• Previous by thread: Is there a technical issue?
• Next by thread: RE: bohemians, gentry
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread