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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML - Final

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
  • To: keshlam@us.ibm.com, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:32:10 -0400

But if DOM L3 will be based upon the Infoset, and the Infoset doesn't
contain DTDs then how will that work? Will there be an Infoset L2,3 etc? Or
won't DOM L3 be Infoset based ... in which case we are back to the question
that started this whole discussion. Now I'm confused.

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group

> -----Original Message-----
> From: keshlam@us.ibm.com [mailto:keshlam@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 9:13 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: Arbitrary Infoset boundaries (was Re: Common XML - Final
> >By not including DTDs as part of the infoset or DOM, the W3C groups are
> >making the simplification
> Speaking as a member of the DOM WG:  Don't read too much into this. The
> fact that DTDs have not been included to date merely means that we haven't
> been willing to address them until we had a better understanding of how
> they do or don't interact with XML Schemas, since if at all possible we
> want to provide a single API to access both (many? all?) content model
> languages. DOM Level 3 is finally starting to address this issue, though
> there are still some open questions.
> I can't speak for Infoset. But again, I'd beware of confusing "we haven't
> done it yet" and "we don't think it should be done."
> ______________________________________
> Joe Kesselman  / IBM Research


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

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