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

Re: Principles of XML design

• To: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Subject: Re: Principles of XML design
• From: Uche Ogbuji <Uche.Ogbuji@f...>
• Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 10:29:55 -0600
• Cc: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <0f38e342973d0996f72284409ab2176b@r...>
• Organization: Fourthought, Inc.
• References: <1115333449.13308.140.camel@borgia> <1115325327.13308.98.camel@borgia> <427AA198.90604@o...> <200505052313.j45NDiK07174@f...> <1115379166.23451.26.camel@borgia> <0f38e342973d0996f72284409ab2176b@r...>

On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 12:05 -0400, Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote:
> > Sure.  I pointed out that Infoset connection in the article.  This
> > distinction has not been common knowledge.  Considering that the 
> > Infoset
> > is not normative in a surprising number of XML applications (i.e. 
> > you're
> > not using WXS, XQuery, c14N, XInclude, etc.), this is certainly
> > something that there should have been at least some more attention to 
> > in
> > the XML 1.0 spec.  Evidence for that is that element parse order is a
> > question that does come up among users in practice, and they tend to
> > look to the spec for inspiration.
> 
> I think that if anything, all discussion of processing, including 
> attribute order, should be removed from the spec. XML is a syntax, and 
> what applications do with it is entirely up to them. Parser behaviour 
> is best defined in that standard (i.e. SAX et al)...

What standard?  Many parsers do not use SAX.  There is no standard
processing model.  Users do seek a standard processing model.  That's
the problem.


> and that will 
> determine the "infoset" that results when using those parsers. Whether 
> the parser specifications themselves refer to yet another spec 
> (InfoSet) is an open question...

I understand your basic point.  If there were a standard processing
model, that would be one thing.  The problem is that there isn't, and
it's well demonstrated that this is a source of confusion.  This
confusion is the problem.  It could be solved in any number of ways, of
course, but saying so doesn't itself make up a solution.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net                    http://fourthought.com
http://copia.ogbuji.net                   http://4Suite.org
Use CSS to display XML, part 2 - http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/x-dw-x-xmlcss2-i.html
XML Output with 4Suite & Amara - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/04/20/py-xml.html
Use XSLT to prepare XML for import into OpenOffice Calc - http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-oocalc/
Schema standardization for top-down semantic transparency - http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think31.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• References:
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • Principles of XML design
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <Uche.Ogbuji@f...>
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <Uche.Ogbuji@f...>
  • Re: Principles of XML design
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Next by Date: Re: Principles of XML design
• Previous by thread: Re: Principles of XML design
• Next by thread: Re: Principles of XML design
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread