Lists Home |
Date Index |
Martin Klang wrote:
> so do you feel that XPath or the data model it relies on compromises full
> adherence to XML?
Unfortunately, yes, precisely because it is a datamodel which it relies on, rather
than the specification by syntactic rules which is XML 1.0. It is entirely
possible for a datamodel to afford full compliance with real (i.e., syntactic)
XML, though in that case I might wonder why bother to abstract the syntactic
definition to a datamodel before building tools upon it. The risk which I fear is
a datamodel divorced from the syntax and eventually not accountable for the
compliance, at a syntactic level, of tools which rely on it. This is by no means a
new subject for this list :-). I have swung on that permathread with some
regularity over the past five years.