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

Re: The subsetting has begun

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: The subsetting has begun
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 01:00:09 -0500
• In-reply-to: <3E5AA523.5050806@t...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F804B54D2A@R...> <3E5AA523.5050806@t...>
• User-agent: KMail/1.4.3

On Monday 24 February 2003 06:05 pm, Tim Bray wrote:
> Well, despite being a vociferous defender of UniodeWithBrackets, I can
> see the necessity for the infoset, merely for the community of spec
> writers.  If you're describing something like schema or xpath or
> whatever, it's just way easier to do it in terms of the data model than
> in terms of syntax.

Right... but FWIW. XPath, and Schema are really tied closely to the syntax of 
XML too. I don't think many many people would say that XPath is a globally 
applicable addressing mechanism for structured data (though I have in the 
past argued for something akin to exactly that)... only that it's good for 
XML.

> I suspect that the infoset is of little interest to ordinary programmers
> doing ordinary work, who will work either at the level of the syntax or
> of some particular API.  -Tim

Right.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Infoset vs pure syntax permathread (was Re: The subsettinghas begun)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • RE: The subsetting has begun
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by thread: Infoset vs pure syntax permathread (was Re: The subsettinghas begun)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread