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

Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:56:14 -0400
• References: <003801c42009$028d36a0$650aa8c0@BOBDEV> <p06010203bca0351c3b8f@[192.168.254.88]> <407AB83A.9070106@s...> <2FA21B69-8C9B-11D8-BC49-000A95A51C9E@t...> <007301c420ae$0001c1d0$9e539696@citkwaclaww2k> <p0601020cbca09b32378d@[192.168.254.88]>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@m...>
To: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 3:16 PM

> At 12:48 PM -0400 4/12/04, Karl Waclawek wrote:
> 
> 
> >As an example, would you say that an application which generates
> >SAX call-backs from an internal proprietary object model, for the
> >purpose of validation (or serialization), does *not* make use of
> >the Infoset abstraction
> 
> Correct. It does not make use of the Infoset abstraction. It makes 
> use of the SAX abstraction which is related to but not the same as 
> the Infoset abstraction. It probably makes use of a subset of the SAX 
> abstraction.

Formally it is not the same, I guess.

However, it seems to me that whenever I am referring to
an XML document that does not (yet) exist in a (necessarily)
abstract way, I am creating some sort of Infoset-like abstraction.
That is close enough for me - the difference doesn't really matter.

Actually, the SAX abstraction alone may be rather impractical.
I would find it hard to map my proprietary object model directly
to SAX without coming up with some Infoset-like abstraction first,
even if it is not formalized.

Karl

• References:
  • RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
  • RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The "what is XML" permathread revisited -- was Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e
• Next by Date: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• Next by thread: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread