- From: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:23:39 +0100
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>, "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Michael Kay writes: > >> Exchanging typed data makes sense to me. Doing it by reducing all the >> data to text, and then sending the type information separately in >> another document, to be matched up with the serialized instance by >> means of a complex parsing process, doesn't make much sense at all. If >> you want to send typed data, the type information should be embedded >> in the instance. > > Reasonable persons might differ. The association between types and > tokens need not be complex, and the benefits of separating a contract > from what it governs are substantial, in my experience. I agree with MKay well defined sentiments 100% … I can see completely the benefits of separating out this contract, but the 80/20 rule does not apply to this scenario. Similarly I don't see why this scenario occludes the existence of any other. Jim Fuller
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2013 07:30:52 UTC