[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: XML Conformance Levels [Was: ERB Decisions of March 26th]



[Peter Flynn:]

| >       XML-CORE:    fully supported or no support at all
| >       XML-LINK:    fully supported or no support at all
| >       XML-STYLE:   fully supported or no support at all

(By the way, the thing that everyone is calling XML-CORE is actually
called xml-lang.)

| > Now really sit back and let that sink in a minute. If you want to develop
| > an XML processor/application, you either support CORE or not. Fine so far.
| > But if you want *any* linking or stylesheets (and you can't approach HTML's
| > functionality at all without both) then you must implement both *completely*.
| 
| Yep. I think any attempt at XML implementation without both of those is 
| entirely wasted. I can already get all of that with Panorama or Multidoc 
| Pro.

It's interesting (glancing briefly forward as I try to catch up with
my mail) that subsequent discussion in this thread seems to have
focused on uses of lang+link without style and missed this assertion
that xml-lang is useless all by itself.  There will be *thousands* of
applications that use xml-lang alone for the exchange of structured
data between processes and among databases.  In fact, based purely on
the number of applications (i.e., running pieces of code), I wouldn't
be surprised if there were ultimately more XML applications that used
XML without links or styles than ones that did.  A lot of these
applications will be invisible to the user, but that doesn't mean that
they won't be there.

Jon


References: