• To: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>
• Subject: RE: What is XML For?
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:04:06 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: Anupam Singh <avsingh@h...>, "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <D60D8F448216D611A21A00508B62B5BC5DD9@e...>

> Yes, okay.  But where's the type system, the defined functional operators,
> the logic interpreter?  They're probably all going to be implicitly assumed
> by the receiver

Sure.  Just as the "business logic" processor receiving any XML document
is assumed, too.  Again, I said "objects on the wire."  Who knows, perhaps
someone will define a new PI:  <? corba "Locate" ?> and various object
models will be reconciled via XSLT.  But that's a pipe dream for another
day.

> In XML, you're not assuming any of that, unless you choose to.

Hence my aphorism that "XML is a superset."
	/r$

• References:
  • RE: What is XML For?
    • From: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>

• Prev by Date: HTML A attributes: what people actually use
• Next by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Previous by thread: RE: What is XML For?
• Next by thread: RE: What is XML For?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread