Re: Why the Infoset?
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote: > At 02:37 PM 8/2/00 -0400, Paul W. Abrahams wrote: > >The debate over the Infoset might be clarified and sharpened by > considering the > >following normative statement, to be added to the Infoset spec: > > > >Whenever two XML textual constructs map into a single construct of the > Infoset, an > >XML processor must produce identical output for those textual constructs. > > > >Personally I favor this, but not with any solid sense of conviction. > Simon St. > >Laurent in particular has advanced some cogent arguments against it. > > I don't find the proposal you put forward very much different from the > existing Infoset, though it makes stronger claims about conformance. That's exactly the point. The normative effect of the existing Infoset document is unclear, although you've assumed it's there (and you feel it's misguided). My wording puts teeth into the Infoset. When you argue against it you're arguing against something with real meaning versus arguing against something far more nebulous. To reiterate: my aim was to focus the discussion, not so much to argue for a particular resolution one way or t'other. Paul Abrahams
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format