Re Section 3.4: "PC: Main reason to use XML is neutral format for interoperability [Chris] xml gives interop major reason " This is a difficult concept without some definition of interoperability. As stated, it is a bit too breezy for an architecture document. We've had problems with the term "interoperability" since the CALS usage of it for SGML. It tends to imply that moving XML among systems is sufficient to enable them to interoperate at the semantic level, that is, blindly. This is not the case. XML ensures portability of data. Portable data enables interoperability. Systems interoperate. By definition, networked systems require selectors to choose among equally probable options. XML cannot in and of itself, being a syntax, enable interoperability. More is required. I'm not sure how one goes about saying what that more is, except to relate it to the protocol verbs and interpretation of the content of an XML document. lenReceived on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 09:43:28 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:45 GMT