W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > August 2009

RE: Proposal for Issue 6700

From: Li, Li (Li) <lli5@avaya.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:23:41 -0400
Message-ID: <7DC6C0F0E8D7C74FB4E1E73CC371280A01196B62@300813ANEX2.global.avaya.com>
To: "Ram Jeyaraman" <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com>, <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Cc: <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Ram,

The main reason to take this approach over the previous one was that we
don't have to maintain the explicit mapping between XML and Infoset. If
this premise holds, it hopefully also addresses the practical issue that
Infoset for all specs can be done quickly.

What are the missing mappings and do you think it is possible to work
them in this framework without spelling out the Infoset?

Thanks.

Li
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Jeyaraman [mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 8:43 PM
To: Li, Li (Li); public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Cc: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
Subject: RE: Proposal for Issue 6700

I like to question the purpose of this exercise (issue).

> This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set
(Infoset) and not in terms of XML 1.0, even though the specification
uses XML 1.0
terminology.

The first part says that the specification is defined in Infoset
notation, but the later part says that the specification is uses XML 1.0
terminology. Is it true that the specification is defined in terms of
Infoset?

Further, the mapping provided in the second paragraph of the proposal is
a partial mapping and not a complete one.

What is the point of leaving the exercise of mapping the XML document to
Infoset as an exercise to the reader. What do we gain by saying this?

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Li, Li
(Li)
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 7:47 AM
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Cc: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
Subject: Proposal for Issue 6700


This proposal is based on the consensus between Ashok, Wu and Gil. To
complete the Infoset description for WS-Eventing, we propose to just add
the following text at the end of "Section 3.1 Notational Conventions" of
WS-Eventing, instead of following the approach taken by 6424:

---
This specification is defined in terms of XML Information Set (Infoset)
and not in terms of XML 1.0, even though the specification uses XML 1.0
terminology. A mapping from XML to Infoset is straightforward as
described below, and it is recommended that this should be used for any
non-XML serializations.

XML documents map to Infoset Document Information Items.  XML Elements
map to Infoset Element Information Items (EIIs) and attributes map to
Infoset Attribute Information Items (AIIs).  The *children* property of
an Element Information Item (EII) is a collection of EIIs corresponding
to its Element Children.  The *attributes* property of an EII is a
collection of AIIs corresponding to its attributes.

See the Infoset specification [http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/] for
more details.
---

We hope this proposal can be applied to related issues 6701-6704 as
well, by adding the above text to the "Notational Conventions" section
of each corresponding spec.

Li Li
Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 18:24:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:18:09 GMT