Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
John Cowan wrote: > AFAIU he wants to keep the freedom to manipulate incoming data at the syntax > level, and not be bound by a "universal" data-binding engine that disappears the > XML in favor of some specific instantiation of it. Quite. Once again the distinction between constraints in the lexical space and those in the value space. The latter are in practice implementable only by local process against specific local instantiations. The former *can* be enforced across the gulf separating autonomous nodes. As John illustrates with the case of servers, it is occasionally useful to enforce such constraints as a condition of realizing an outcome for which there are, in fact shared or similar expectations between data creator and data recipient (particularly when both expect that the recipient's own output will be returned to the initial creator). > I think his concerns are overblown, but not unreasonable in principle. :-) Respectfully, Walter Perry
|
