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

XFM (or something similar)

• From: Sean McGrath <digitome@i...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 19:05:03 +0000

All,

Some time ago, as part of the SML discussions an idea
was mooted that some sort of standard notation describing
how XML parsers differ, would be useful. For want of a better
name it was called XFM - XML Features Manifest. (The obvious
name for us SGML crusty types would be "XML Declaration" but
that name is taken.).

The idea is that parser writers and document creators
would have a notation to use to describe their
tools/documents and thus
	1) improve interoperability
	2) Make it easier to compare/select tools

For example, a non-validating XML parser have an XFM
that specified things like:
	0) DTD Awareness
	1) Expansion of external entites
	2) Enforcement of Unicode name rules
	3) character set support
	yada, yada	


Do xml-dev'ers think XFM is a good idea?

If so, in order not to clutter up this list, send
me the things you would like to see in XFM. I will
pull'em together and report back to XML-DEV with
an ordered list.

If not, lets meet in the bar at XML'99 anyway. Any
excuse will do:-)

Please put "XFM:" in the title of your e-mails.
Thanks.




xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XFM (or something similar)
    • From: "Stephen T. Mohr" <smohr@v...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Database: position papers ?
• Next by Date: Re: XFM (or something similar)
• Previous by thread: [SML]My opinion - Leaving out attributes
• Next by thread: Re: XFM (or something similar)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread