Why validate? (was Re: Parser compliance)

[Richard Lanyon]

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Matthew Gertner wrote:

> It may
> not be a sure thing, but it's certainly plausible that future XML
> applications will be a combination of relatively low-level procedural
> code and relatively high-level descriptive code (in the form of
> schemas). There is no precedent for this, DTDs or other, which makes the
> whole business quite exciting to think about.

It also makes it slightly worrying - the fact that it's new means that
it's less likely to catch on, IMHO. Many, many people are familiar with
writing basic (or even BASIC) procedural code, which makes me think that
whatever catches on in the field of small-scale webpage XML scripting is
likely to be procedural. While I can see why a more declarative style
might be appropriate for a large-scale project, these sorts of reasons are
not the reasons why HTML caught on in the first place.

-- 
Richard Lanyon (Software Engineer) |     "The medium is the message"
XML Script development,            |             - Marshall McLuhan
DecisionSoft Ltd.                  |


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe 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)