[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG

• To: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>
• Subject: Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
• From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:03:24 +0100
• Cc: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <3DA172C2.B9ED2A1@f...>
• Organization: Jeni Tennison Consulting Ltd
• References: <E17yS6Q-0005C3-00@m...><f5b65wed6dd.fsf@e...> <005801c26de5$272f60f0$6500000a@KENNY><160931649370.20021007105345@j...> <3DA172C2.B9ED2A1@f...>
• Reply-to: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>

Hi Walter,

>> I think that the basic point he makes -- that whenever someone adds
>> something new to the Infoset they should also provide a standard
>> XML representation of that -- is a very good one that would really
>> support the idea of accessing annotations as a node set using an
>> axis or function. Very cool.
>
> I am sorry if this sounds tendentious, but what is a 'standard XML
> representation'? Is it a particular vocabulary, i.e., an application
> of XML? Could you give an example of what you are proposing?

A particular vocabulary -- an application of XML. See:

  http://www.w3.org/2001/05/serialized-infoset-schema.html

for the schemas for such vocabularies.

> IMHO if we are talking here of XML, a syntactic framework, or even
> of best practices for the use of XML, we must be careful in our
> prescriptions neither to constrain the extensibility through markup
> which is the essential nature of XML, nor to substitute a collection
> of vocabularies, however extensive, for the general applicability of
> XML syntax.

Can you run that by me again? Are you saying that it's better to
change the syntax of XML in order to allow annotation (e.g. by
allowing attributes to contain structured values) rather than
annotating an *Infoset* and then revealing those annotations by a
processing convention?

(If you are, I think that I agree in a way, but I think there would be
a lot of resistance to changes in XML syntax.)

Cheers,

Jeni

---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• References:
  • Re: Annotations in XPath-NG? (Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
    • From: "David Rosenborg" <darolst@p...>
  • Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
  • Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: heritage (was Re: SGML on the Web)
• Next by Date: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
• Next by thread: Re: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread