- From: Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:30:18 +0000
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Mark Baker wrote, > I understand how some believe that this may helps clarify the > situation by isolating what they see as inconsistent models. But > from my POV, doing so always prompts a question; wouldn't a unified > model in which XML namespaces, cars, and web pages could all be > included, necessarily be more general and powerful? > > Whether you agree that the model Roy describes is that model or not > (I believe it is), do folks believe this is a worthy goal? If so, > perhaps we could say something in webarch about that? Maybe worthy ... but probably a fools errand. Think carefully about what you're asking for: a model which is expressive enough that it could embed _any_ other model that anyone might reasonably adopt for _any_ other reasonable purpose, without too much pain or effort. I don't believe there's any such beast ... at least, I've never run across one. Even within the restricted domain of programming models, I wouldn't expect there to be one that'd have much chance of qualifying as both universal and universally acceptable ... would you? Cheers, Miles
Received on Friday, 24 January 2003 08:30:51 UTC