- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 19:47:06 +0100
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org, "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>
On Friday, February 28, 2003, 7:20:14 PM, Claude wrote: BCLL> I could probably make up an explanation based BCLL> on the relationship of redundant parts to BCLL> maintenance of systems in which parts fail BCLL> (logistics 101: PPM and failure modes), BCLL> but that would have to describe BCLL> features of XML that enable redundancy in BCLL> description of content (eg, labeled type BCLL> by name and/or relationship by position in BCLL> the tree) or in the XML system itself. BCLL> It might be a good grad student thesis, BCLL> but not a short explanation. Ok so this is the "why closing tags contain the element name" argument. That gives me redundancy, of a sort (although content transfer encodings like XMill then remove that redundancy which could be a problem on lossy transports). Still no link with persistence - I am inclined to think that it may have been a conflation of two ideas, 'brain-faster-than-hands' or just a simple error. BCLL> The author of that statement (whoever BCLL> it was) should be the one to defend it; otherwise, BCLL> I agree with you that it should be dropped. Good. -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 28 February 2003 13:47:19 UTC