Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Using a label as a bracket seems to be overkill. LISP. Using a URN as a bracket seems to be overkill. XML. Insisting the label has meaning says the label names a type (and the relational theorists guffaw at the markup theorists). Using the word proudly because without it, this thread just becomes obscure. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Ronald Bourret [mailto:rpbourret@r...] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:22 AM To: xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word Tim Bray wrote: > Since > nobody is arguing that it's a bad idea to have context-sensitive > content models, Actually, I have, at least half-heartedly. Part of my objection is the expense of figuring out what content model applies, but most of it is that I would like a label to tell me what something *is*. (This is different from what something *applies to*, which usually is context-sensitive.) On the other hand, the cases put forward both by the OO community (Matthew, me) and the well-formed community (Evan) are good use cases. My gut reaction to this sort of fence sitting is to not support it and add it later if there is demand. (Along these same lines, the best hiring advice I ever heard was that if you only think a candidate can do the job but are not really sure, don't hire them -- you'll almost invariably regret it.) -- Ron ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
