OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Does the XML syntax have an underlying data model?

Lauren and Henry, hello.

On 17 Apr 2016, at 19:28, Lauren Wood wrote:

Some people on the XML WG did not want to define a data model. It
wasn't only a matter of not having the time. It's the 'bits on the
wire' philosophy
(https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/199x/1999/08/18/BitsOnTheWire is
an example).
...in response to Henry writing


(TL;DR: "Angle brackets and equal signs are just an Infoset’s way of
perpetuating itself")
These two positions are _highly_ compatible. A tree of Infoset nodes _is_ the document (from one point of view), but if you want to transport it somewhere else, you need a wire protocol (as Tim Bray stresses, in my reading of the blog post), so you invent XML and document it very carefully, and talk about it in enough detail that many people mistake the XML serialisation for the document.

Of course, historically this happened in the opposite direction (and I appreciate this may be a quixotic point of view), but in my head that is the natural and productive sequence.

A tree-centred approach is why I think [1] is a better approach to DigSig than one based on a canonical serialisation.

All the best,


[1] http://text.nxg.me.uk/2015/b65m

(when do I get to say 'HyTime' again? Please?)

Norman Gray : https://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS