Re: [xml-dev] [OT] Re: [xml-dev] Lessons learned from the XML experiment

[David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com> wrote:
> On 11/15/13 11:45 AM, David Sheets wrote:
>>
>> Please direct me to the relevant source that refutes that XML was
>> "designed for nodes".
>
>
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>
>
> One mention of 'node', in a non-normative appendix using other people's
> terminology.  That hasn't changed in more recent versions or in XML 1.1.

Ah, I understand the difficulty. I believe I should have said
"elements". I was thinking in terms of generic trees and picked the
word "node" instead. Are "nodes" substantially different from
"elements" in this context?

> There may have been people thinking of nodes, but "designed for nodes" is
> ridiculous.

Is "designed for elements" ridiculous?

> The Infoset didn't appear in even a draft until over a year later.
>
> Asking people to prove your negatives is a good way to end a conversation,
> though!

Did I ask you to prove a negative? Could you point me to that request?
I thought I only asked you to refute my positive assertion ("designed
for nodes") which you have. I originally intended "designed for
elements". Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks,

David

> Thanks,
>
> --
> Simon St.Laurent
> http://simonstl.com/
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php