Re: XML Data -was- RE: [UCR] Public Comment clarification of term use

On May 16, 2006, at 10:46 PM, Vincent, Paul D wrote:

> +1
>
> [Actually, I find it worrisome that this should be questioned at all!]

Well, I have some questioning. The W3C already has a plethora of  
languages and apis for dealing with XML...are we going to reuse them?  
Exactly how? What does "working with/against XML data" actually mean?  
(And XSLT is already a rules language...do we need to include it?)  
XPath integration?

It's not like that we can *prevent* rules from working on something  
which reasonably counts as XML data. On the other hand, there's  
reason to be cautious in our positioning since there are other  
"products" at the W3C that we definitely don't want to be seen to  
compete with.

I suspect that some sort of XPath integration would be relatively  
straightforward and uncontroversial (mostly), but specifying it would  
be seriously nontrivial (in terms of amount of work). Is this  
important enough to standardize as part of RIF per se? (As opposed to  
leaving it to idiosyncratic application/library support that is  
opaque to the RIF level?) How many rule languages currently have  
specific language level support for XML? If none, there, assuming  
we're about "interchange", there's nothing to do.

Cheers,
Bijan.

Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2006 08:00:55 UTC