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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] heritage (was Re: [xml-dev] SGML on the Web)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]


Jeni Tennison wrote:

>Hi Walter,

>I'm just trying to persuade Patrick not to use a syntax that's
>similar-enough-to-XML-to-be-confusing as the input to his processes in
>the examples that he uses.

In my defense, I am trying to persuade Jeni to not see a data model as a 
limitation on a particular serialization syntax.

What I find confusing is the binding of data model and serialization 
syntax. It is useful if I want to determine if the syntax in a 
particular set of data meets the data model but I could well want to 
read/interpret/use that same syntax for another data model. By allowing 
the selection/imposition of syntax in a set of data, I can conform it to 
any data model I desire (subject to the limitations of my processing 
abilities) and that seems like an advantage to me.

If for example, one wanted to say that a document must not contain any 
markup (in the XML defined sense) that did not meet the well-formedness 
rule and a particular DTD or schema, that is certainly doable with the 
JITTs process as it has been outlined. I imagine such cases occurring 
when one needs to send a file to a person who has not upgraded to a 
markup processor that divorces data model from serialization syntax.

I will try to add some well-formed XML examples today so there will be 
non-confusing examples of how JITTs applies to standard XML documents. I 
don't find the examples confusing at all, but then I did not find our 
paper confusing but bow to the weight of public opinion that it, 
perhaps, just perhaps, is confusing. ;-)

As I said, yesterday and I suppose it bears repeating, JITTs can use 
standard, valid, well-formed XML documents and syntax for many things. 
It can also use XML syntax that violates the XML data model but I fail 
to see why that is confusing?

That a serialization syntax is based on a particular data model is fine. 
But the interpretation of that serialization syntax should not be bound 
to the data model of its origin. (For those readers with a literary 
criticism background, this can be roughly compared to adapting 
reader-response criticism to markup processing. As Stanley Fish would 
say (adapted): "...what they are searching for [structure of a text] is 
never not already found." From the conclusion of: "Is There a Text in 
This Class?")


Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature


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

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