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

Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)

• To: Nikita Ogievetsky <nogievet@c...>
• Subject: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• From: Sam Hunting <shunting@e...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 12:56:22 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <165f01c2a784$7760f600$1101a8c0@VAIOCOGI>

> 
> However, if there is another person "X" who
> uses tomorrow different syntax to express same meaning
> or same syntax to express different meaning, etc...
> (i.e. not being conservative)
> than the best think I can do is to ignore his/her information at all.
> 
> This is actually a topic map authoring in a nut shell. :-))
> Indeed, you can use RM4TM to "udermap"
> (is it a good neologism ?) any markup.

Nikita, is it a typo for "undermap" or possibly "ubermap" ;-) Not sure I
see what you mean here. Can you give a use case?


> --Nikita.
> 
> Nikita Ogievetsky, nogievet@c...;
> Cogitech Inc.        http://www.cogx.com
> Topic Maps Tutorials and Consultanting.
> phone:  1 (917) 406 - 8734
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>
> To: <xml-dev@l...>
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:13 AM
> Subject: Re:  Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
> 
> 
> > On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 15:03, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> >
> > > The "troubles" are already built into the XML 1.0 specification, To some
> > > extent, I've seen Common XML as a reponse to the conservatism that XML
> > > 1.0 _allowed_ for non-validating parsers as regards skipping external
> > > DTD subsets and entities.  Much of my motivation in writing Common XML
> > > was to show readers how to avoid the landmines produced by tools being
> > > conservative in what they accept and perhaps liberal in what they
> > > discard.
> >
> > Isn't it what I have said ;-) ???
> >
> > The only way to cope with tool which are conservative in what they
> > accept and perhaps liberal in what they discard is to be conservative in
> > what you send!
> >
> > In any case, if the industry was going in that direction, we would need
> > new types of schema languages: the current ones do filter the structure
> > and content of XML documents without filtering any of the basic XML
> > features. If XML "sub-profiles" (such as defined by SOAP) were to be
> > widely used, we would also need schema languages to express the
> > constraints defined by these profiles!
> >
> > Eric
> > --
> > Freelance consulting and training.
> >                                             http://dyomedea.com/english/
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
> > (W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
> 

Sam Hunting
eTopicality, Inc.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Turn your searching experience into a finding experience."(tm)

Topic map consulting and training: www.etopicality.com
Free open source topic map tools:  www.gooseworks.org

XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web.
Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
    • From: "Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@c...>

• References:
  • Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
    • From: "Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@c...>

• Prev by Date: Node identity in XQuery
• Next by Date: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Previous by thread: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• Next by thread: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread