[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Paul W. Abrahams" <abrahams@valinet.com>
- To: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:12:57 -0400
Paul Grosso wrote:
> At 17:57 2000 07 31 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> >...I don't find
> >the Infoset adequate either. Its philosophy of partial abstraction (at
> >least it's not meta-meta-abstraction) just seems plain broke.
>
> It might help me to understand your position better if you
> could compare and contrast your feelings of the Infoset [1]
> with the XPath data model [2].
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-infoset-20000726
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#data-model
The XPath data model is clearly necessary to the understanding of the rest
of the XPath spec. Were it to be deleted, the XPath spec would be full of
dangling references. It's not clear that were the Infoset to vanish in a
puff of smoke, many dangling references would be found in other specs.
There's one in XInclude, I understand, but that one could easily be
reworded to avoid using the Infoset.
Paul Abrahams
|
