[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On 25 Feb 2003 at 10:24, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:21 AM
> > To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> >
> > jcowan@reutershealth.com (John Cowan) writes:
> > ><span tone="huffy">I suppose you think it's just an accident
> > that the
> > >Infoset happens to talk about elements, attributes, processing
> > >instructions, namespaces, etc.?</span>
> >
> > The part that amazes me is people who want to use that
> > particular abstraction to describe things other than markup!
>
> Why are you amazed? The abstraction works well for defining structured
> and semi-structured data plus the proliferation of tools that exist for
> manipulating and otherwise processing instances of the abstraction are
> quite useful to many producers and consumers of data.
True. People have been talking about using those concepts to
represent whatever data they had for some time; I remember talking to
people about it back in very early DOM days (1997). Tree-processing
concepts can be used for things other than XML ;-)
Lauren
|
