RE: What is an XML document?

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

The point is that "process" is the meaningful way to determine
"documentness". 
In the context of the debate:

o  Dan thinks: XML document = "a purely abstract notion defined by a formal
rule."  

o  John thinks:  XML document = "well-formed XML", a concrete notion
referring 
   to something that has physical existence.

The question would be how Dan does apply his rule?  John states it clearly.

Dan can only test once he asserts it is an "XML" document.  Then John's 
test applies. 

SGML asserts that process determines documentness.  Applying a 
process to an abstraction to prove membership in a set it  
without application until one states the rule of process.  
One can use access to prove existence, but not type unless 
access requires type.

Semantic = Means to choose

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob DuCharme [mailto:bob@udico.com]

The meaning of "process," as with "document" or "information," can be
considered in broader or narrower senses to cover wider or narrower domains,
but if we read it in the sense of  "data processing" I think the SGML
definition for "document" still works fine. It also helps photographs to fit
in better--a photograph that can be processed as data can easily be part of
a document. The processing by the corner camera store of the film from my
camera is outside of the data processing domain.