[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: "'Elliotte Rusty Harold'" <elharo@m...>, "'Michael Champion'" <mc@x...>
• Subject: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:59:52 -0400
• Cc: "''xml-dev' DEV'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <p0601020bbca09a41ff08@[192.168.254.88]>
• Reply-to: <bob@w...>

Elliot Rusty Harold wrote:
> DOM and SAX at least can handle documents that do
> not have infosets, and I think XPath/XSLT can too
	What does it mean to say that an XML document "does not have
an infoset"? I'm a bit puzzled by the words here. I thought that any
XML document could be described via an Infoset. What am I missing? (My
apologies if this is a silly question or if I've missed something very
fundamental in the XML specs...)
	If such documents exist, then how frequently do they occur?
How much of a loss would there be if a "binary alternative" to XML was
defined as only being able to handle XML documents that could be
described by an Infoset?

		bob wyman

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• 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