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

RE: Typing and paranoia

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>,"Mike Champion" <mc@x...>
• Subject: RE: Typing and paranoia
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:26:59 -0800
• Cc: "XML Dev" <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcKdMpILs056UyfiRNu/NjEhCtV2FQAANeeZ
• Thread-topic: Typing and paranoia

I'm not getting into this debate but just want to point out that W3C XML Schema is defined in terms of the Infoset not the XML 1.0 syntax. 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] 
	Sent: Fri 12/6/2002 6:19 AM 
	To: 'Mike Champion' 
	Cc: XML Dev 
	Subject: RE:  Typing and paranoia
	
	

	The "essence"?  Disapprovingly?  No.  I
	simply don't like to see the clarity of
	the XML 1.0 specification muddied by attempts
	to use XML as a brand name for platforms.
	That's retrograde.
	
	1.  XML is a syntax defined by its BNF in the
	XML 1.0 specification.
	
	2.  XML platforms are software whose definition
	depending on the specifications used, can be
	both non-standard and unreliable.  I said "can be".
	
	3.  XML application languages are defined in
	terms of the XML 1.0 specification or other
	languages derived from it such as XML Schema.
	These languages may have platform data models.
	
	4.  XML The Brand Name is a term some are
	making up to conflate platforms and XML.  This
	is confusing and wreaks havoc in the non-expert
	understanding of XML.
	
	5.  Interoperability is a property of platforms,
	not specifications or standards.   Depending on
	the means chosen to interact with a platform
	and to move information among platforms, interoperability
	reliability varies by combinations of platforms.  Experience
	shows the most reliable means is to rely on the
	syntax of the XML 1.0 specification.   This is
	not to say that other means cannot be reliable
	but this varies by combination of particular
	platforms and application language data models.
	
	I don't disapprove of the infoset.  I do understand
	the data model approach to platforms and their
	implementation of application languages.  But these
	are not XML.  XML is a syntax specification. It
	is not a brand name.  Going down that path opens
	the door to closed system vendor dominated transactions
	and systems.   The markup community has worked for
	too many years to break the logjam of homogeneous
	systems design to stand idly and watch this progress
	lost to fuzzy marketing terminology.  This I have
	to fight.
	
	len
	
	
	From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...]
	
	As Martin Gudgin says in the piece that Len quoted (disapprovingly?)
	
	My objective is very much like Tim's -- to maximize the value of the XML
	"brand name".  That requires careful consideration of what is of the essence.
	
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
	
	

• Prev by Date: RE: Typing and paranoia
• Next by Date: RE: Typing and paranoia
• Previous by thread: Re: Typing and paranoia
• Next by thread: RE: Typing and paranoia
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread