[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Just for my edification - I thought the term XML was specifically
claimed by W3C as a generic term and therefore was _NOT_ specifically
defined or controlled by the W3C. Am I missing something or
misunderstanding the implications of "generic term"?
Regards,
Don Bate
At 9:10 AM -0800 2/22/03, Tim Bray wrote:
>Text of a feedback note I just sent to the community-feedback
>address, cc Jon Ellis, the Sun guy who posted here:
>=============================================
>I understand the proposed XML parsing facility in J2ME accepts not
>XML but a nonstandard subset which does not allow for the DOCTYPE
>declaration. It's OK to define a custom language for your own
>purposes, but it's not OK at all to use the term "XML" in describing
>it; this term is very precisely defined and is legally protected by
>the World Wide Web Consortium; anyone who offers software with XML
>in the name which is deliberately non-conformant to the
>specification is putting themselves in a very shaky position both
>legally and technically. I am not speaking for the W3C but if Java
>continues in this misguided direction I will pro-actively start
>taking measures to protect the integrity of the term "XML" via the
>W3C and public advocacy.
>
>On a technical front, and speaking as the author of the first-ever
>XML Parser in the Java language (non-validating), which had a
>bytecode footprint of less than 50k, I found that the code footprint
>caused by parsing the DTD was negligable. Now, external entity
>processing is expensive, but there is no requirement to do that.
>There is no requirement to fetch/process the external subset.
>Processing the internal subset does create an opening to the
>"billion laughs" DOS attack, but it would be perfectly reasonable to
>implement self-defense against that with a simple limit on the size
>of the internal entity stack, which would cost about one line of
>code.
>
>On the larger front, XML has succeeded quite remarkably in providing
>interoperability to a degree not observed in other data interchange
>facilities. There are indeed many programmers who read the XML spec
>or one of the 30 shelf-feet of books now on sale explaining it, and
>bash out software, and use MSIE or expat or something to
>sanity-check it, and send it out into the world. If J2ME advertises
>a nonstandard subset as "XML", this is a recipe for an
>interoperability disaster.
>
>Tim Bray
> - co-editor, XML 1.0
> - co-editor, Namespaces in XML
> - member, W3C Technical Advisory Group
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
--
Don Bate | Specializing in Consulting and Mentoring in
Bate Consulting, Inc | Object-Oriented Technologies,
| Software Architecture, and Software Process
(972) 618-0208 voice
(972) 618-0216 fax
donbate@iadfw.net
|
