Lists Home |
Date Index |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Foster [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 19:01
> To: Alessandro Triglia
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Non-infoset
> We would all like these numbers. What percentage of XML is:
> - Hand-authored?
> - Program-generated?
> - Used for data exchange?
> - Used to generate publications?
> Of the hand-authored XML, what percentage is written using tools that:
> - Expose POT (plain old text)?
> - Edit only the infoset (like form editors)?
> - Edit only the infoset plus entities (like WYSIWYG XHTML editors,
> structure editors)?
> There are several permathreads around these questions, but I've never
> seen a convincing answer here to these, or in fact, to any
> question. I hope you have better luck. However, the last time it was
> suggested here that the percentage of hand-authored XML
> written in POT
> was small relative to the total, it was pretty roundly disagreed with.
That is a very good answer at last.
I was not asking for actual numbers or percentages, but for hints on what those percentages may be.
And I did not suggest, even for a moment, that exposing POT is a bad thing, or that XML should be simplified, or that some universal tool should take over some of the responsibilities of the author.
What I did suggest (and am trying to determine) is that the infoset may be more important than some people believe for a large class of applications that exchange XML documents.
> Bob Foster