Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minu tes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML))

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.



Received on Friday, 28 February 2003 13:47:19 UTC