• To: 'Chris Burdess' <dog@b...>, 'Gavin Thomas Nicol' <gtn@r...>
• Subject: RE: Principles of XML design
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 15:42:29 -0500
• Cc: 'XML List Developers' <xml-dev@l...>

So you have a world of true believers and a world of disbelievers.
Sorta looks like the American culture at the moment.  It doesn't 
augur well for predictability at either extreme of behavior.

When an application doesn't meet user expectations, it is broken 
by definition even if it is broken by design. 

You see, if I lead my users to expect that behavior and I support 
it and you don't, they will be unhappy with your software, not mine. 
Welcome to the co-referent relationship, a.k.a, shotgun wedding.

len


From: Chris Burdess [mailto:dog@b...]

Not at all. The spec says the order of attributes is not significant. 
Whether one processor or another chooses to believe that it is 
significant is irrelevant. Building an expectation of such behaviour 
will simply leave your users confused and unhappy when they start using 
another, conformant XML processor without that behaviour and their 
application is broken.

• Prev by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Next by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Previous by thread: RE: Principles of XML design
• Next by thread: Proper way to use redefine in an hierarchichal set of schemas
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread