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

Re: syntax

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: syntax
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 26 Apr 2002 15:57:05 -0400
• In-reply-to: <LKPOZWUQ1Y2WWVON1ROSNWWTNSPH.3cc9a640@MChamp>
• References: <LKPOZWUQ1Y2WWVON1ROSNWWTNSPH.3cc9a640@MChamp>

On Fri, 2002-04-26 at 15:10, Mike Champion wrote:
> 4/26/2002 2:41:04 PM, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> wrote:
> >I'm not expecting the entire world to use XML syntax - it's not ideal
> >for everything - but when it's time to present a canonical and
> >processable view of information, it's glorious stuff. 
> 
> I presume that most of us agree in principle.  There are a few
> smokestacks spoiling the glorious view, however:

Sure thing.  It's an industrial landscape, right? 

> 1- Not all syntax is canonical; you need something like the 
> InfoSet to say that single/double quotes don't matter, etc..

No, but XML is in some substantial sense more canonical than the
collection of all other formats.  Whether or not you use single/double
quotes is much less an issue than whether you use a binary format of
your own invention.
 
> 2 - Some syntax is sugar, but sugar is tasty: CDATA sections come to
> mind; they're nice for some things (escaping scripts being the
> canonical example) but they'll disappear from your syntax if you run 
> it through XSLT.

Sure.  I was looking at XML syntax as a canonical view on other
information in this quote.  For my own work, I'm  doing what I can to
preserve things like CDATA sections and single/double quote distinctions
in MOE, as I can find the time, but can't take responsibility for the
syntax damage other people's use of an Infoset view inflicts.

> 3 - There's a lot of inefficiency in that syntax, either for humans
> to produce, or to stuff down narrow bandwidths to small devices, or
> whatever.  

Yep.  That's where XML as a canonical view is handy.  "XML's a pain for
this!"  "Okay, fine.  Do what you want to do, but when it's time to ship
it to me, transform it into XML."

> 4 - For better or worse, many recent specs are not based on the 
> syntax  -- XPath/XQuery, SOAP, DOM (of course).  This produces
> an impedence mismatch.

Yep.  I can't do much about those except curse the dark.

> So, how do you deal with all this and still enjoy the view?

Pretty much what I do with the current state of politics in my home
country (USA).  Keep talking, and hope that things change over time.  I
do what I can to encourage people to use XML, and hopefully to use it in
ways that are easily shared.

I don't expect the world to change itself for me.  I hope that a few of
my ideas might take root in the world.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• References:
  • Re: syntax (was RE: What is "the Web")
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: syntax (was RE: What is "the Web")
• Next by Date: RE: What is "the Web"
• Previous by thread: Re: syntax (was RE: What is "the Web")
• Next by thread: RE: What is "the Web"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread