Re: XML Syntax/Semantics

[srh@us.ibm.com]

Transporters,
I see Bob's point on the Syntax/Semantics issue, and agree some sort of
semantic dictionary MAY be needed.

I would suggest that it not be made mandatory for all elements/attribs.
I believe that XML's (theoretical) self-describing nature can indeed be
unambigously
self descriptive for certain elements. So long as it is not mandatory, I
think it's
a good idea (but "SemanticID" may a better choice [or "SID" for brevity]
since
my experience is that "ID" is a common (and yes, ambiguous !) tag name
liked by domain folks for some reason. I have two other concerns on this.

-We need to realize that this implies some sort of "central authority" to
issue
these tags. This is probably my biggest concern here. I would like to avoid
such authority.

-There could be a tendency to want to move toward using these IDs as the
element names themselves. This of course could render an XML document
useless to the human eye unless you turn yourself into something like a
travel agent with a memory full of codes. I know one could argue the
perspective that these docs are really for machines not humans, but I
believe there is merit to keeping it as human as possible.

Thanks,
Scott R. Hinkelman
IBM Austin
SWG Java Solutions
XML/Java Standards Architecture
Office: 512-823-8097 TL793-8097
Home: 512-930-5675
Cell: 512-940-0519
srh@us.ibm.com
Fax: 512-838-1074