Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > -----Original Message----- > From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] > > On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 12:36, Jonathan Robie wrote: > > So far, I really feel like we are discussing various people's > > philosophies > > of XML. The requirements for XQuery were based on use > cases, not on philosophy. > > Right, Jonathan. Every use case (except maybe update) should > be considered critical and spared from possible trauma of any > possible philosophical or aesthetic objection. The committee > obviously has the best priorities for which cases matter. > Notions of what markup is actually good at should have > absolutely nothing to do with decisions about how to use markup. Well hold on there, Johnathan's got a point. Does anyone on this list have /examples/ or anti-use cases? The objection from aesthetics is important, though not in my humble, but correct opinion, compelling. Uses cases are the pictures that speak a thousand words. On the other hand, all the extra goodies, is it /necessary/ that they be core to XPath2? Uche's suggestion of conformance (which I take means comformant profiles), seems perfectly sensible. The hardest part of XML has always been understanding what to throw out. Bill de hÓra -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 7.0.4 iQA/AwUBPNgTz+aWiFwg2CH4EQI6ogCeLRK820/WSXWmOT17x/sx7AZe+t8AoPPG NVA2KIft2d/WnlA3RwuJKZst =O3rr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
