Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> Yes and no. A schema-less XML document is absolutely fine for most > things. If you need object semantics then you need a schema. But a schema doesn't tell you the semantics (although certain schema languages might tell you how certain element types relate to others). When a human devises FooML, they generally come up with a vocabulary of labels (perhaps made universally unique via namespaces), a bunch of syntactic constraints (a schema), some human prose describing what the labels mean, and maybe some code for doing cool stuff with FooML documents. (Ultimately the human prose would probably be used by other people to write code for doing cool stuff, too) The semantics are in the human prose and the actions the code performs. Not the schema. James Tauber 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
