Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Non-infoset
 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Foster [mailto:bob@o...] > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 19:01 > To: Alessandro Triglia > Cc: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: Non-infoset > > We would all like these numbers. What percentage of XML is: > > - Hand-authored? > - Program-generated? > - Used for data exchange? > - Used to generate publications? > > Of the hand-authored XML, what percentage is written using tools that: > > - Expose POT (plain old text)? > - Edit only the infoset (like form editors)? > - Edit only the infoset plus entities (like WYSIWYG XHTML editors, > structure editors)? > > There are several permathreads around these questions, but I've never > seen a convincing answer here to these, or in fact, to any > quantitative > question. I hope you have better luck. However, the last time it was > suggested here that the percentage of hand-authored XML > written in POT > was small relative to the total, it was pretty roundly disagreed with. > That is a very good answer at last. I was not asking for actual numbers or percentages, but for hints on what those percentages may be. And I did not suggest, even for a moment, that exposing POT is a bad thing, or that XML should be simplified, or that some universal tool should take over some of the responsibilities of the author. What I did suggest (and am trying to determine) is that the infoset may be more important than some people believe for a large class of applications that exchange XML documents. Alessandro > > Bob Foster > > 
|
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
|
|||||||||
