words (RE: extensibility in XSchema?)

[Paul Prescod]

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Trevor Turton wrote:

> This sounds accurate to me -
> anyone else have a sharp definition of sentacs versus symantix?

No, I do not believe that such a sharp definition exists. That does not
mean that we can wave a magic wand and have the concepts disappear,
however. Even without precise definitions, the words are useful and
important. If, in the real world, we threw away every word that did not 
have a mathematical definition, we would not have many words left. Since 
XML lives on the border of the "real world" of human thoughts and ideas 
and the quasi-mathematical world of the computer, we must expect to deal 
with both that which is well-defined and that which is fuzzy.

 Paul Prescod


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)