Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Vocabulary Combination and optional namespaces
 "W. E. Perry" wrote: > > james anderson wrote: > > > Bill de hÓra wrote: > > > Which 'the abstract data model' would that be? > > > > the one in terms of which operations in your processing-environment-of-choice are > > expressed. > > Petitio principii, I fear. perhaps, but not in the sense which i suspect you intend. > The larger point is that after 5+ years of XML processing a > significant number of practitioners have discovered (or reaffirmed what they already > knew) that XML applications are effectively monolithic from the syntactic instance to > the idiosyncratic output. perhaps because they presume models (data and processing) which engender molithic applications. > That is the inescapable consequence of a syntactic > definition of XML--a hard fact which has been lost on, or ignored by, ancillary > specifications that insist on introducing specious abstractions between the > syntactically-conformant instance and some processing of it appropriate to a desired > specific outcome. To induce from the nature of particular processing some abstract > data model which appropriately describes an XML input instance as handled by that > process may be a useful exercise in designing or refining the implementation of that > process, but it is at best otiose to the XML instance itself, or indeed to other > processing which might usefully manipulate that instance for other purposes. Grasping > for such abstractions is the fundamental misconception (some days I am tempted to > think 'obstinance') which regularly diverts conversations in the XML community from > XML to not-XML. yes, it would be possible to process xml with a pencil and a large pad of paper. please do be more specific. i do, in fact, regret that, over the years no user has indicated that the model was limiting. could be a social thing. > (Parenthetically, I am *very* sorry that Tim Bray might have absented > himself from this present thread, addressing as it does core issues raised by our > syntactically-defined standard. Given their fundamental nature, raising those > questions is never out of order, nor is stare decesis in the name of the Namespaces > Rec an adequate disposal of them.) i did not intend that there should have been anything in my notes to imply some imperative for the encoding rules specified in namespaces in xml. ... 
|
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
|
|||||||||
