- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:30:09 -0500
- To: 'David Orchard' <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Dave, there are systems out there (witness X3D) that are interoperating nicely with multiple syntaxes because the standard on which they are based defines an abstract model first. So one can say syntax is an easier foundation to use where one can get widespread agreement on one, but not that it is 'foundational' for the web. It's convenient. Even that where syntax is convenient, it doesn't have to be one syntax as long as all syntaxes used within the model are publicly and clearly documented. Security is an interesting corner case. len From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] +1. While it is true that interoperability is only really achieved by the fruitful union of syntax, APIs, data models, and semantics (heck add in test suites...), syntax is the foundational piece. Removing syntax leaves much less chance of interop. Granted, cases exist where interop has been achieved without it, but there are far fewer of those. In fact, a number of security folks over wss land have been arguing that without syntax, there is zero interop because security can only be applied on syntax.
Received on Saturday, 25 October 2003 15:30:12 UTC