[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 7:40 AM -0700 5/9/02, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>I think that you are saying that XML, as defined by the current XML
>specifications, should not be confused with XML. I find that
>confusing.
>
There's only one current XML specification. It is the document
entitled Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition). Even
parts of this are optional. This document defines XML. What's
confusing is that some W3C members persist in claiming there's more
to XML than that; that XML 1.0 does not suffice to define XML and
that you cannot build new applications on top of XML 1.0 without also
pulling in schemas, the Infoset, the PSVI, XInclude, and the kitchen
sink.
The Infoset does not define XML. XML Schemas does not define XML. The
XPath 2.0 Data Model does not define XML. Everything beyond XML 1.0
including the Infoset, schemas, XSLT 1 and 2, XPath 1 and 2,
XInclude, and a lot more are *OPTIONAL* technologies that developers
can use or not as they see fit.
A lot of us want and need the freedom to pick and choose between the
extension specifications, and the order in which we apply them,
depending on what is useful for a particular project at a particular
time. In particular, we object strongly to building specs like XSLT 2
on top of the PSVI and the W3C XML Schema Language instead of
building them on top of XML 1.0.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
