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

Re: The subsetting has begun

• To: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: The subsetting has begun
• From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
• Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 16:21:23 +0000
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20030226160545.0207fd18@m...>
• References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030226160545.0207fd18@m...>

On Wednesday 26 February 2003 16:09, Sean McGrath wrote:
> [Len Bullard]
>
>  >What would be interesting would be a comparison of Common XML and XML-SW
>  >to determine what features two groups considered essential and how they
>
> differ.
>
>  >You say the essential subset is:
>  > 2.2 Elements
>  > 2.3 Attributes
>  > 2.4 Namespaces
>  > 2.5 Textual Content and now revise that to unbundle the namespaces
>  >so elements, attributes, text are core. Given there are those who
>  >say attributes are a botch, an even more conservative position is
>  >elements, text and if we go more minimal than that, we are back to CSV.
>
> No. CSV goes too far because you loose the very essence of what gives
> XML its modelling power - named nodes in a directed acyclic graph.

It's not a DAG; you can't share subtrees. It's a tree!

>
> Sean
>

ABS

-- 
A city is like a large, complex, rabbit
 - ARP

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@f...>
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Use cases for parsing efficiency (was Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????)
• Next by Date: RE: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: RE: The subsetting has begun
• Next by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread