[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 01:42:28PM -0800, Derek Denny-Brown wrote:
> > From: Liam Quin [mailto:liam@w3.org]
[...]
>> One can do validation in the writer and then plausibly skip the sort
>> of checks you mention in a reader, and still be talking about XML,
>> even with today's textual interchange formats.
>
> The problem with that is that it now becomes possible to load invalid
> XML.
That's true. You can make invalid documents with DOM interfaces, too,
but that in itself doesn't mean the DOM is a bad idea... it's a
trade-off, that has to be balanced against usefulness.
[...]
> That doesn't mean that parsers can't provide options to turn
> off expensive checks, just that they should be enabled by default for a
> generic implementation.
Agreed.
>>> I have yet to hear of any proposed solution which successfully
>>> balances the different demands.
[...]
> > Neither am I, which is why W3C has a Working Group to investiate
>
> And I totally concur with others, that spending the time to really do
> some serious requirements gathering is key, and am glad to see it
> happening.
OK, cool :-)
Liam
--
Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/
|
