Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "W. E. Perry" <email@example.com>
> Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> > For data/document transfer, there should be no variability of the infoset possible:
> > what you send is what they get. I think it is a basic matter of data integrity.
> <HOWL theme="I saw the best minds of my generation . . .">
> We cannot go there. The definitive, canonical, stable, predictable form or version of
> an XML instance is . . . that XML instance.
??? I believe Bill's objection is that the recipients will (always) rationally choose what
information or even tags they consider of interest. No objections.
However, in the absense of special knowledge, they cannot know what was in the external
subset, so they cannot rationally choose. They can only hope. An instance in which
declarations are arbitrarily not received is a corrupt instance.
The following sentence was in that post specifically to address Bill's point, which I
expected he would make:
"A receiving application should be free to pick whichever information
items it requires: however, this should be on the basis of the kind or
name or type of information item, not how the sender happened to
compose the message."