• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 11:58:21 -0700
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0DF730@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0DF730@h...>

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> [...]  We don't seem to be able
> to have an efficient self-descriptive document and we
> don't want to accept augmentation via external documents
> (eg, DTDs, schemas).  Is this an impasse that can be
> met by compromises in certain applications, but only
> narrowly and for a given application, but otherwise,
> kicks off the same discussion for any new problem?


Mu.


> I am beginning to believe that attempting to work
> with self-descriptive systems for any given problem
> in every case is a non-starter.

Exactly!


> Well-formedness simply isn't enough for interoperability;
> portability, yes, but not interoperability.

To that I would add: XML namespaces don't solve the problem either.




--Joe English

  jenglish@f...

• References:
  • RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Next by Date: Re: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Previous by thread: Re: RE: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Next by thread: Re: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread