[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bob,
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Bob Wyman wrote:
[stuff I agree with]
> If you're going to create a compact syntax, please, do us a
> favor. Ensure that it is easily and deterministically mapped to and
> from some base syntax. I would prefer that you use ASN.1 since it has
> been proven over the years to handle a great breadth of syntaxes. But,
> if you can't do that, then consider mapping to XML Infoset instead.
> While you may think that the domain of your "compact syntax" is
> limited today, it is the way of things that if it is a good syntax,
> its domain will grow. Help interop by making sure that conversion to
> and from your syntax is as obvious and clear as possible.
Well, the Lx tool I advertised does just that inasmuch as it defines a
mapping to and from SAX events, and thus to the Infoset (hmm, is that
true in general? I sense a theorem approaching). Was this addressed to me?
I'm sure ASN.1 would be an interesting exercise, and might be the
excuse to investigate ASN.1 I've been waiting for, but since the
point of what I was doing was to generate a SAX stream that XT or
javax.xml.transform.Transformer could eat, SAX was the obvious target.
All the best,
Norman
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Gray http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/
Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK norman@astro.gla.ac.uk
|
