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

RE: Marketplace XML Vocabularies

• From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
• To: "'xml-dev@lists.xml.org'" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
• Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:42:08 -0500

 
Awesome message Ken. Thanks!

> Actually, a processor is required to produce the end result *as if* 
> it had implemented the described behavior.  It is not required to 
> behave as described in the specification.  It is a subtle but 
> important distinction

I like it! A specification describes the end results of processing elements, i.e., it's an effects-based description.

> So, I would say that XML vocabularies only describe meaning and not 
> behavior. 

Shouldn't a specification of an XML vocabulary provide both meaning and effect?

For example, consider this element:

   <Author>...</Author>

A specification could provide just the meaning of the <Author> element, perhaps something like this:

    Author: a person who writes a novel, poem, essay, etc.

The meaning is nice, but what effect should result from an application processing the <Author> element? That, it seems to me, is vitally important for a specification to provide. Do you agree?

Assertion: an XML vocabulary that has aspirations of ending up in the marketplace must be described by a specification that provides both meaning and effect. Do you agree?

/Roger

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
  • RE: Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
  • Re: Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: "David A. Lee" <dlee@calldei.com>
  • RE: Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: Dan Vint <dvint@dvint.com>

• References:
  • Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
  • Re: Marketplace XML Vocabularies
    • From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>