Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: John Cowan <email@example.com>
- To: Sean McGrath <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:06:28 -0400
Sean McGrath wrote:
> The W3C infoset work seems to be to bless two levels
> of abstraction:
> a) XML entities are a stream of bytes
> b) XML entities consist of elements,attributes,data ...
> (all the stuff in the Infoset doc)
Actually, there are (a1) the byte level and (a2) the character level.
Both are important.
> (X) This is the space where what SGML called
> "markup sensitive" apps. live. Apps that care about the
> difference between "Hello world" and "&greeting;".
> Apps that care about default attribute values etc. etc.
> (Y) This is the space where high fidelity roundtripping apps
> live. Apps that care about the difference between:
> <name first = "Sean" last = "Mc Grath"/>
> last = 'Mc Grath'
> first = 'Sean'></name>
I think it's pretty arbitrary of you to call the Y level "high
fidelity", just as it's arbitrary for me to call the b level
"the Infoset". But we both agree that a line must be drawn somewhere.
> There needs to be N infosets (N > 1) to cover
> the range of application types people build with
We used to have that explicitly, with a "minimal infoset", a "maximal
infoset" and every possible infoset in between. It was a mess to
describe. Now we have:
1) one standard infoset
2) conformance means documentation of what you provide and what you don't
3) any app can add its own info items and properties
(right down to the a level if you want)
4) the "core conformance" infoset is one possible subset
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <email@example.com>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)