Lists Home |
Date Index |
Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> My point is the packaging.
Yes, I know that. However, you use words which say something a great deal more: "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." There are, in fact those--as you know--who do intend
that there be no variability of the infoset. To achieve that goal is to vitiate the point of XML. I
cannot make this point too strongly. Integrity in transmission of the complete XML instance is a
worthwhile goal, but in practice no more than a question of logistics. Conveyance of intent, or of
command, or of some canonical outcome of processing is an ideological goal to be achieved only at
the expense of the ultimate syntactic reality of the XML instance.
> Variability due to time or circumstance or availability is not the kind of variability I am
> talking of.
Thank you for saying so. However, I do think that adequately making the point may require explicit
acknowledgment that the infoset elaborated from processing an XML instance on a given occasion will
predictably vary from the infosets elaborated on every other occasion of comparable processing.