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

Re: Non-infoset

• To: Alessandro Triglia <sandro@m...>
• Subject: Re: Non-infoset
• From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:00:59 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1.3.200504110007.72543@m...>
• References: <1.3.200504110007.72543@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217

Alessandro Triglia wrote:
 > See above.  I know for sure that there are many applications that 
don't care about defining entities and referencing those defined 
entities, or that are happy with either attribute delimiter, and so on. 
  I would conclude that those applications would be happy with 
exchanging infosets instead of XML 1.0 documents.  I am trying to 
determine what is the weight of those applications overall.

We would all like these numbers. What percentage of XML is:

- Hand-authored?
- Program-generated?
- Used for data exchange?
- Used to generate publications?

Of the hand-authored XML, what percentage is written using tools that:

- Expose POT (plain old text)?
- Edit only the infoset (like form editors)?
- Edit only the infoset plus entities (like WYSIWYG XHTML editors, 
structure editors)?

There are several permathreads around these questions, but I've never 
seen a convincing answer here to these, or in fact, to any quantitative 
question. I hope you have better luck. However, the last time it was 
suggested here that the percentage of hand-authored XML written in POT 
was small relative to the total, it was pretty roundly disagreed with.


Bob Foster

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Non-infoset
    • From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>

• References:
  • Re: Non-infoset
    • From: Alessandro Triglia <sandro@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread