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

RE: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpress

• To: "'bill.dehora@p...'" <bill.dehora@p...>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: RE: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpressions vs. XML)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:37:27 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

It's been "The Beef" or lack of it about markup from 
programmers for as long as there has been markup. 
This is really olllllllldddde ground.

The problem was selling XML as the solution when 
in effect, no one completely defined the problem. 
Otherwise, you wouldn't need REST and there 
wouldn't be an xml: namespace.  There are limits 
to the applicability of well-formedness.  The 
debates come down to where and in what form all 
the other extra information gets enscribed.

There is an effective limit to 80/20 based engineering. 
It depends on everyone else accepting the solutions 
someone else prescribes to the bits you didn't. That 
IS the 'herd mentality' and we do depend on that, 
aka, rough consensus.

len

From: Bill de hOra [mailto:bill.dehora@p...]

Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> We've talked for years about the value of separating content from
> presentation in XML.  On the data side, that seem to map easily to
> separating information from processing.

Data from processing; sure.

I've just remembered Bill Joy had a similar beef with HTML/XML a 
good while back. In an interview he once said the problem with 
sending markup was it had no behaviour - for that you need programs. 
It may have been in the context of Jini/JXTA.

• Prev by Date: Re: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpressions vs. XML)
• Next by Date: RE: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-expressions vs. XML)
• Previous by thread: RE: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpressions vs. XML)
• Next by thread: RE: Still not the essence of XML (was Re: S-e xpressions vs. XML)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread