Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Jonathan Robie wrote: > > ... > > Formal notation is a Good Thing. Readable prose is a Good Thing. But let's > not pretend that English prose is a precise, formal language. I don't think that the problem was prose. Even though I railed against the infoset for being prose-based the deeper problem with XML 1.0 is that many people explicitly denied the need for a formal data model. There are still people who think that ambiguities in the model behind the XML specification are helpful rather than harmful. Most W3C specifications still do not have a formal data model. "First you need to admit that you have a problem." -- Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself It's difficult to extract sense from strings, but they're the only communication coin we can count on. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html *************************************************************************** This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers. To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ ***************************************************************************
|
