From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,9983e856ed268154
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.66.88.133 with SMTP id bg5mr1257101pab.11.1345584937345;
        Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.107.167 with SMTP id hd7mr9714wib.0.1345584936966;
        Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 a5ni2pbv.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!7no34069611wig.0!news-out.google.com!q11ni248280880wiw.1!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!193.252.117.184.MISMATCH!feeder.news.orange.fr!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 23:35:35 +0200
From: Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net>
Organization: Home - http://www.obry.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; fr-FR;
 rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Should Inline be private in the private part of a package spec?
References: <501bd285$0$6564$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <502c149e$0$6579$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <ak8h9w7770bx$.ncrikznng6v3$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <502cd701$0$6568$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <pstv4iafyysv$.1mq6dicsj9my0.dlg@40tude.net>
 <502d3c68$0$6572$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <mhbnq53dwqt2.r7w4k1ptmxf1$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <502e9039$0$6557$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <40tmogy4d1b5.1kc2gm8qfrkdu.dlg@40tude.net>
 <503240ed$0$6569$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <ciztlfv7tfhf$.taw9f39y1oa4$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <50326457$0$6576$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1qril0ny3eczr$.1vlhpbrjyyb8k.dlg@40tude.net>
 <503375ac$0$6565$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1vglgit7vnu4l$.2ytljabrhk2.dlg@40tude.net>
 <5033986c$0$6573$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <62h5nifarvom.1myeqdyevhefq.dlg@40tude.net>
 <5033b4d8$0$6571$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <gpcuiu6p58gd$.118wuad9bdmvo$.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <gpcuiu6p58gd$.118wuad9bdmvo$.dlg@40tude.net>
Message-ID: <5033ff28$0$6185$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Aug 2012 23:35:36 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 90.2.57.58
X-Trace: 1345584936 reader.news.orange.fr 6185 90.2.57.58:3268
X-Complaints-To: abuse@orange.fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-08-21T23:35:36+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry,

> The problem of transformation XML documents does not exist. I don't see why
> data exchange needs that. I don't see why any transformations would be
> necessary between systems.

You don't see why because you seem to try hard to deny XML any benefit.
Exchanging structured data is an important point. Before XML we were
using many format and we had to write parsers for all those formats in
every languages. Now with XML (and the corresponding xsd, or wsdl) it is
possible to parse (and *validate*) any data set coming from any
applications.

Maybe you don't like XML, but you just can't say that this is not an
important point. At least the current situation prove you that you are
100% wrong, look around there is XML everywhere.

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|    http://www.obry.net  -  http://v2p.fr.eu.org
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B