xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierpaolo Fumagalli <p...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Is XML simple? (was Re: Yet Another Xerces/Xalan question)
Date Thu, 02 Mar 2000 05:30:04 GMT
Eric Hodges wrote:
> I think XML is simple.

Lexically speaking? It's a markup language... And yes, it's simple...

> If you ignore all the other stuff (DTDs, XMLSchema,
> XPath, XSL-T, etc.)

This is not XML, these are standards based ON xml, but they are not XML
(as the language is defined, of course, place back the DTD in that!).

It's like saying... JAVA is simple (as a language) but the whole
Platform 2 class library is not...

> XML can be defined with a trivial grammar.  The idea
> itself is pretty obvious to anyone that's spent much time converting
> different data comm protocols.  Encoding the schema along with the data was
> an idea I helped implement at a major check verification company 7 or 8
> years ago.

I don't know... The issue was arised by Brian in his keynote to the
XTECH conference... Should be the standards more "implementation
friendly" or more "academically complete" ???

> I think Arnaud  Le Hors may have hit the nail on the head with his post on
> this topic.

I believe Arnaud is right... We need to find a compromise... And, apart
from a couple of doubtful things, the effort seem to have succedeed so


-          P              I              E              R          -
stable structure erected over water to allow the docking of seacraft
<mailto:pier@betaversion.org>    <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
- ApacheCON Y2K: Come to the official Apache developers conference -
-------------------- <http://www.apachecon.com> --------------------

View raw message