Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: CDATA sections in W3C XML Infoset
 > The DOM *will* change to accomodate the InfoSet by a parse-time > option to throw away CDATA section markers, I hope the DOM does do this, but for the reason that users want it, not "to accommodate the Infoset". As I have said before, Infoset conformance does not require anything of the kind. > I *hope* that Mr. Cowan's quote means something like "better for the > DOM to figure out how to peacefully co-exist with XPath/Query/Schema > than for the other specs to have to wrestle with the raw syntax stuff > that the DOM has to deal with." I'm not sure which quote you're referring to, but the sentiment is just right. In considering the specifications that might use the Infoset, the core WG [*] concluded that (in Paul Grosso's words) the DOM is the outlier. There is a group of specifications including XPath, XSLT, XML Query, XML Schemas and XInclude that have very similar data model requirements. The DOM needs more, and those extras are closer to the syntactic level. (Of course, applications like editors go even further in that direction, in some cases even to the extent of operating on not-well-formed documents, but it was always clear that the Infoset would not cover all of their needs.) Thus the needs of the DOM in some cases lost out to other considerations. One could imagine an extended Infoset covering the needs of the DOM, and the DOM group could perfectly well decide to produce one and use it to define its object model. I've no idea whether they are likely to do this. [*] I'm not making an official core WG statement here, just describing my recollection of the history. -- Richard 
|
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
|
|||||||||
