Re: I'd like to un-raise augmentedInfoset-22

Tim Bray wrote:
 >On the basis of further investigation, I don't believe that there is an
 >architectural issue here.  My raising of the issue was based on an
 >erroneous impression that XQuery has a normative dependency on the PSVI,
 >which is not the case.  Should a situation arise in which W3C or other
 >work does develop normative dependencies on the PSVI, it may be the case
 >that we want to consider the architectural implications.  But for now, I
 >don't think it should be taking up space on our (crowded) agenda.

I'm afraid that by doing this the W3C would be ducking what is likely the 
ugliest and most difficult issue in markup's future on a technicality.

The W3C has already poisoned markup substantially with W3C XML Schema's 
various notions of type.  While XQuery has taken a few steps to separate 
itself from the PSVI, its own notions of type substantially complicate 
XQuery and have infected XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0.

The PSVI is just one especially nasty aspect of the problems created by 
retrofitting notions of type which come from object-oriented and relational 
systems (conflicting notions, at that) onto markup.  I expect the 
inconsistencies and complications of this decision to take a heavier toll 
on XML and the W3C than namespace and URI issues have taken in the past.

The W3C needs to think seriously about what it wants from markup.  I think 
the W3C has lost sight of the promise XML originally had for the Web, as a 
lightweight format for loosely-coupling information producers and 
consumers.  Instead, recent efforts seem to be aimed at recreating CORBA or 
DCOM, a style of technology I thought the Web had pretty much shown up over 
the last decade.

These seem like fundamentally architectural issues to me, needing some 
serious discussion with a heavy dose of courage.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 08:08:22 UTC