Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
![Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment](/images/get_stylus.gif) On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com> wrote: > On 11/16/13 7:15 AM, David Sheets wrote: >>> >>> Asking for a source to demonstrate a pure negative is not reasonable. >> >> >> I was not asking for a demonstration of a negative i.e. "Prove that >> XML was not designed for nodes". I was asking for *any* evidence that >> the claim did not hold. > > > "Refute" was the wrong choice of words, then. "Refute" usually asks for a > strong demolition, not just a glancing blow. That was why I made the same > complaint John just did. If I make an assertion and you respond with "Absolutely not", I expect you to muster a refutation. If you say "Why do you make this claim?", I am more than happy to lay out my argument. >> I am really quite surprised that a group of otherwise logical people > > > Never expect people to be logical. You can barely expect computers to be > logical. > > >> have such a hard time understanding that the statements "XML was >> designed for nodes" and "XML was designed for elements" > > > At least you're learning the local language, but... > >> have nearly zero distinction > > > To you, perhaps. To folks who regularly bounce back and forth between > elements in markup and nodes in data models, they're cousins at best. > > >> with respect to the question of "Can element omission >> be used to model optional elements?" > > > I think you meant to say "Can element omission be used to model optional > [data structures]". > > "Can", of course. Well, sort of. The interesting question isn't "can", but > "is it a good idea?". There's no general answer to that - it all depends on > what you want to do and in what context. Is it a better idea than using the string "null"? Other solutions include special attributes or a distinct element. Are there still more that are simple to express in XML the Syntax? Does XML lack something that would make using the command string "null" preferable to one of these other options in some context? David > The absence of a real answer may also have contributed to the chaos in the > conversation. > > Thanks, > > -- > Simon St.Laurent > http://simonstl.com/ > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS > to support XML implementation and development. To minimize > spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. > > [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ > Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org > subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org > List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php 
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|
|||||||||
