OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: Why the Infoset?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Michael Champion <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>
  • To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
  • Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:10:45 -0400

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Champion" <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>
To: "XMLDev list" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: Why the Infoset?

> For example, the XML
> spec says that "<empty></empty>" and "<empty/>" are both well formed XML
> elements, but nothing about whether they are equivalent.  Infoset says (or
> at least the previous draft did) that they are.  Likewise, as was pointed
> out earlier, InfoSet says that certain well-formed XML elements such as
> "<ns::foo>blah</ns::foo>" do NOT have an unambiguous internal
> representation. Without the InfoSet, it would be unclear if this is an
> element named "foo" with a namespace prefix "ns", an element "foo" with a
> prefix "ns:", or an element named "ns::foo".

Sorry, this is unclear.  I should have said, without the Infoset, we could
argue about which was correct ... but the InfoSet says that there is no
correct answer, because this "non namespace well-formed" document can't be
represented in the InfoSet.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS