Henry Luo wrote:
> XML is already given. And we cannot change it to make it a strong typed
> markup language.
> However, is it better for an markup language to be strong typed if
> invented from scratch?
No, it's not better. XML is unbiased regarding typing, you can leave it
in a vanilla untyped state or you can use an external definition to
enforce any typing system that you like onto it, as strict or lax as you
want, as static or dynamic as you wish, etc. This means that your data
is a lot more useful, since different kinds of processing applied to it
can see it using the typing approach most suitable to them, as opposed
to a one-size-fits-all typing approach that has historically
consistently failed to be generally useful in describing the world.
Merging again what has been pleasantly orthogonalized is IMHO a step back.
--
Robin Berjon
Senior Research Scientist
Expway, http://expway.com/
