Re: Data Dictionary, Draft 2

[John B]

> These sort of issues feel like they should be simple, but I don't
think they
> are. This is one case where the little things add up to big things.
While I
> don't want to sound too negative, this is one area where we really
need to
> be careful because it could end up adversely affecting the simplicity
of xpl
> and the ability to have an application that can make sense of messages
from
> new applications.

I have to agree with Paul entirely on this one.
I think that the way xPL schemas are structured hierarchically at the
moment
works very well, and IMO is a great strength of the protocol.

The problem with the dictionary approach for naming the tags in a body is
that
depending on the schema, the tags may have completely different meanings.

What IMO would be far more useful would be to specify a list of standard
data
formats, e.g. date, time, temperature, latitude, etc. but not enforce in
what
circumstances they are used - those details should be decided by the
context of
whatever schema is using them - not by a global data dictionary.

Regards,

John