Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
greetings, am i the only one who is struck by the frequency with which such clarifying remarks appear on this list? i know there was "SGML" and there was "HTML", but why is does XML have to be "XM<EM>L</EM>"? 1. the PR is so absolutely clear that it is intended to be a notation and not a language. 2. there are other related - but autonomous - standards (XSL, XLL, DOM) which address various of the sorts of semantic concerns which are necessary before a means to encode becomes itself a code/language. that is to say it neither trys to be, nor is, nor needs to be a language. that given, why isn't the constellation something on the order of XMLn, XMLss, XMLls, XMLdom? just wondering, james, W. Eliot Kimber wrote: > XML [operates] at the document representation syntax level [only], so it can > have nothing to say about the semantics of the data represented. On the > other hand, XLL and HyTime (and DSSSL and XSL) operate at the semantic > level and therefore may have lots to say about the semantics of the data > represented. xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
