- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:32:30 -0700
- To: Tyler Close <tyler@waterken.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, at 08:59 AM, Tyler Close wrote: > Is it really the absence of a data model that is the source of > success? I think it is the presence of a friendly, textual surface > syntax that is the source of success. If I'm wrong, then defining > a data model for XML, like XML Infoset, reduces the > interoperability of XML. I think the infoset made life easier for spec writers, but added exactly nothing to the interoperability of XML, which happens at the syntax level. > > I think the message should be "Syntax is important", not "Data > models are bad". A system defined in terms of a data model > represented in a friendly, textual surface syntax, could have the > same interoperability properties as the WWW. > Syntax is *essential*, not important. I entirely disagree with the assertion in the last sentence and have observed no existence proofs. -Tim
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2003 12:35:01 UTC