Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 09:58 AM 11/3/2002 -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>firstname.lastname@example.org (Mike Champion) writes:
> >I realize that many/most of you disagree with this worldview, but I
> >think that it's fairly common, e.g. in the SOAP and XPath/XSLT/ XQuery
> >worlds. I suggest that people who accept the contrary "the only
> >foundation is the XML 1.x syntax" worldview should be somewhat careful
> >not to assume that concepts that have no representation in the W3C
> >infoset (much less my hyper-minimalist data model!) are universally
>There really is no single foundation, just a lot of different
>perspectives that can find justification in various bits of chapter and
>verse. The Infoset was unfortunate in that it codified a particular
>view of XML as "XML" to the apparent exclusion of others, but that
>doesn't mean the rest of us need to pay attention to that exclusion.
One purpose of the Infoset is to define what information parsers should
report when parsing an XML file. If we want parsers to work interoperably,
then there really does need to be a single foundation.
Any standard ignores many legitimate points of view so that there will be
one way of looking at things that is interoperable. XML is a standard.