[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Sat, 2003-08-09 at 23:12, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>
> I don't think Eric is proposing to make these issues part of XML 101.
No, I am not even the guy who proposed this idea of "reflecting" the
infoset, Henry and Ari are the ones to congratulate if you like it or
blame if you don't!
> > [Eric van der Vlist]
> > ....
> >
> >Sorry if I have made all this more confused than it should be, but I
> >have the feeling that with XPath, XML schema languages and now this
> >XML serialisation of the infoset we are looping over variants of the
> >same issue and reinvent a different wheel at each iteration and that
> >it could be worth to spend some time to think about all this.
>
> Yes. This loop seems to be spinning pretty rapidly at the moment, and I
> don't see signs of it slowing down. While it's probably better for
> developers who aren't designing generic XML tools and APIs to stay out
> of this conversation, lest their minds join the loop, it's definitely
> worth a closer examination by those already looping.
We already have XPath to describe sets of nodes and XML schema languages
to describe sets of documents. Schematron demonstrates that XPath can be
used as a schema language and I believe that there are more similarities
than we use to think between these two.
If we could rely on what's already there (and eventually extend it) to
describe a document (which is basically a set of nodes and the unique
member of a set of documents composed of himself), that could probably
be a good thing!
Eric
--
Have you ever thought about unit testing XSLT templates?
http://xsltunit.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
