xml-dev - RE: XSet an XML property set

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

I think you have the beginnings of a good plan. 
 
I don't know RDF well enough to determine its 
applicability here.  I am curious to know, 
in brief, if the others in this CC list consider 
this the right way to go about meeting their 
requirements.

I agree with Tim that XML 1.0 is a syntax. 
But the DTD stuff is in there too.  I don't 
have a problem with the current InfoSet but 
I also don't see how DTDs can "go away" when 
so much of the current specifications depends 
on them definitively.  It seems to me that 
the plan you present is a shorter path than 
rebuilding all of these to eliminate DTDs. 

Am I missing something here?  My point has 
been literally, until something really breaks, 
don't fix it.  We have a delicate ecology of 
specs that won't bear heavy feet well.  If 
this plan make them more robust for some subset 
of this user community of designers, then 
do this; otherwise, a lot more versions of 
the applications that make us have to keep 
rewriting fielded code for no profit just 
to keep in sync will make the business types 
mad as hell.  That gaping hole in the schedule 
thing.  At some point, the implementations DO 
have an influence on the specification.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@mediaone.net]

I agree. To make my point, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is
and define an XML property set. I believe the XML 1.0 productions
(http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml) serve as a proper foundation to describe the
XML syntax. That's what this property set defines: syntax.