[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
liam@w3.org (Liam Quin) writes:
>On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 11:36:11AM -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>> [...] It seems like the people who've tried hardest to push the
>> world to an infoset-centric view of XML are now finding that even
>> that isn't consistent enough for their needs.
>
>I view the XML Information Set spec as defining a vocabulary for other
>specs to use. It's not a serialization spec. The extent to which it
>helps in that area is that at least it helps people agree what they
>are talking about. Or, they can argue about ambiguities in the
>infoset spec, but a`t least they have a starting point for discussion.
>
>So I for one see the Infoset as helping, although I don't like the
>usage illustrated in "an XML parser produces an infoset", because it
>confuses description with the thing described.
You're right about the Infoset, but I deliberately lower-cased infoset
to reference the community of subscribers to the idea that what matters
in an XML document isn't the document but rather the output from the
parser.
Not that those folks are necessarily evil, but they've certainly caused
trouble - and watching them get hoisted on their own petard does, I have
to admit, make me smile depite my best efforts to stay composed.
|
