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

Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach

• To: pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>,John Cowan <cowan@m...>,pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>
• Subject: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:51:15 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <5.1.1.5.2.20030826192416.0231b670@m...>
• References: <20030826014702.GD22176@m...><5.1.1.5.2.20030825095256.00aa4af0@m...><3F436F08.98F7029B@b...><5.1.1.5.2.20030819162545.01c5af10@p...><3F410022.F6599E30@m...><3F410022.F6599E30@m...><5.1.1.5.2.20030819112123.00aa4b78@p...><5.1.1.5.2.20030819125723.030ebc78@m...><5.1.1.5.2.20030819162545.01c5af10@p...><5.1.1.5.2.20030820064638.00aa4b50@p...><3F436F08.98F7029B@b...><5.1.1.5.2.20030825095256.00aa4af0@m...>

At 07:27 PM 8/26/2003, pop3 wrote:

>Umm, reading Knuth got me certain that _assembler_ could be proven and had 
>been proven in math, from which languages like Pascal and Fortan and 
>Cobol  and C can also be, or rather have been proven, and since Java is 
>just C transcendant then I feel that is also shown.
>I do not feel that a markup language with patched on logic capacity can be 
>mathematically shown to be a programming language at all....

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. XML is a data format. It is 
not a programming language, was not designed to be a programming language, 
and has never claimed to be a programming language. The XML community knows 
that, and is not surprised by that fact, so your rant on this topic seems a 
bit odd. Math seems irrelevant here - I am not aware of formal methods 
being used to show whether or not something is a programming language, 
though they are often used to demonstrate various properties of a 
programming language. Or of a data representation, for that matter.

Do you have a specific mathematical question about the properties of XML?

Jonathan 

• References:
  • Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>
  • Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
  • Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
    • From: dbexlist <dbexlists@e...>
  • A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
    • From: dbexcom <lbradshaw@d...>
  • Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
    • From: lbradshaw@d...
  • Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XML fragments in prose?
    • From: dbexcom <lbradshaw@d...>
  • Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
    • From: pop3 <lbradshaw@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: xml taxonomy
• Next by Date: Re: xml taxonomy
• Previous by thread: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Next by thread: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread