[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> XML infosets are already wide spread and will become even moreso in the
> coming years. That is enough reason to have a data model that is
> somewhat bound to the XML 1.0 syntax. However as many proposals for
> alternate syntaxes for XML (including binary ones) have shown this
> doesn't mean that XML infosets necessarily have to be
> UnicodeWithAngleBrackets.
Well, despite being a vociferous defender of UniodeWithBrackets, I can
see the necessity for the infoset, merely for the community of spec
writers. If you're describing something like schema or xpath or
whatever, it's just way easier to do it in terms of the data model than
in terms of syntax.
I suspect that the infoset is of little interest to ordinary programmers
doing ordinary work, who will work either at the level of the syntax or
of some particular API. -Tim
|
