Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
XML is primarily a data interchange format NOT a programming language. Thus it is unwise to make comparisons between XML and Java or Perl. Also, most data transfer protocols include version information at the beginning of the message so I don't see why XML should be any different. -- THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #132 Before appointing someone as my trusted lieutenant, I will conduct a thorough background investigation and security clearance. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Lugt" <roblugt@e...> To: <xml-dev@l...> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 2:58 AM Subject: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1 > Gustaf Liljegren wrote: > > > ... We were > > many who disliked the first mentioning of XML 1.1, not so much for the new > > version number, but for the fact that so tiny changes was taken to justify > > a new version. > > > > My first reaction is that I share the opinion of Gustaf and Mike Kay (among > others) who feel that XML 1.1 will only be worthwhile if it addresses more > of the known issues with XML 1.0. However, I've come to the conclusion that > this is inconsistent with the way that we all normally go about our > business. In software engineering, the perceived wisdom is to perform small > incremental changes, thereby reducing the overall risk of getting it wrong. > Why should the evolution of XML be any different? I have a little theory > for how this inconsistency came about. > > <going long (sorry)> > > It all started with the XML 1.0 declaration <?XML version="1.0"?>. This > signal, from the document to the XML processor, indicating what version of > the spec it adheres to, is the root of the problem. > > I think it would be better if the XML processor worked out for itself > whether a document conforms - and the user of the document should indicate > to the processor what level of conformance he requires or expects. This is, > after all, just how we organize our program source code. We would have > similar problems in programming if we used such mechanisms to signal source > code compatibility. Imagine if Perl scripts like this:- > #!/usr/bin/perl5.1 > or Java source code started with something like "using Java 1.0". The > result would be a strong reluctance to change, even if it was > backwards-compatible. > > Programming languages are continually being refined. We, the users, are > generally pleased when the compiler vendor releases incremental changes (so > long as they are backwards compatible). We don't care if the changes mean > that a program that didn't compile last week starts to compile now, in fact > we are generally rather pleased! There is a corollary here to the XML 1.1 > character issues: existing well-formed documents will continue to be > well-formed and some badly formed documents under XML 1.0 will no longer be > so. If there are changes required to XML that are not backwards compatible > (namespaces), then it should be up to the document recipient to signal to > the processor what kind of documents she will accept. > > Another problematic area where XML documents signal their content to the XML > processor is the DTD declaration. This problem has been recognised with XML > Schemas, moving the responsibility to the receiver of the document to decide > what schema the document should conform to. I think this is another facet > of the same issue. > > If we get rid of the XML declaration, we avoid a problem noted by Elliotte > Rusty Harold some time ago during the blueberry debate, whereby document > editors will feel inclined to mark their documents with the latest version, > whether or not they contain mark-up features requiring that version. It > also avoids an associated problem of knowing in advance what document > version you are going to create in a streaming environment. > > <conclusion> > Get rid of the XML declaration and we can all be a lot more relaxed about > making small, incremental changes to the XML specifications. Does anyone > agree, or should I get my flame-proof underwear on? > > > Kind regards > Rob Lugt > ElCel Technology > http://www.elcel.com/ > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
|
