[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Patrick Durusau wrote:
>> I don't think that I do. I'm quite happy for XML to be interpreted as
>> the Infoset, as the PSVI, as the XPath data model, as the DOM data
>> model, as the LMNL data model, indeed as any data model anyone wants
>> to use with it! XML is a syntax, that's all.
>>
> Sorry, that is simply not correct.
>
> Underlying XML is a data model. That data model is set forth at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Datamodel.html
That is a non-normative fishing expidition by a single member of the W3C
staff and has no official standing of any kind, unless I'm missing
something. There is (by design) nothing in the normative text of the
XML recommendation about its data model. The Infoset is a useful
afterthought.
You can build your own facilities, whatever they may be, with XML syntax
as a basis for interoperation, but you can't assume a canonical data
model is in place, because there isn't one. -Tim
|
