[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Serialization of XDM - Use cases / Proposal
Kurt, could you expand on what you think might be the advantages of a format such as your example ?
I figure in for a penny, in for a pound. Sequence serialization, with or without XDM, is a problem that will only become more prevalent as we start to use sequences of documents more routinely. I'm thinking especially here of the XQuery and XProc use-cases, both of which are fully capable of generating sequences. Changing serialization formats at this stage is a lot easier because of relatively early adoption of these technologies, but that will change as both become more commonplace.
I'm not necessarily saying that there is one, only that if you introduce a formal xdm: or xml: notation for handling serialization/deserialization, this will then need to be processed in some manner in order to create the internal sequence representation, which implies a pre-process step of some sort, whether xml or not. The non-xml format has the advantage of compactness - for some people this is a consideration (for me it probably wouldn't be, but there are people for whom this is a big factor).
I don't really think that singleton content is that much of an issue. You can serialize most singletons now without needing any additional content, but it's worth noting here that such content is, by definition, scalar and dimensionless. If you had an xdm serialization, it actually might make sense to have an <xdm:wrapper> around such singletons, if only because this could be used to provide type information. There is also a distinct difference between a naked singleton and singleton entry of a sequence - the former would just be the xml representation (with or without the encoding header), the latter would be an xdm:wrapper (or xdml:sequence) element surrounding the sequence itself.
Not really. Either way, you'd have to define an EXPath (or fill in the blank standard) set of xdm:serialize() and xdm:parse() in order to track into internal XDM representations. The XML representations are complicated only by the fact that there is no consistent serialization or parse mechanisms in the fn: namepace (eXist's declare-option function would be the closest (and I think there's something analogous in Mark Logic)) but otherwise you'd have to manually walk the tree for each serialization. Kurt
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|