W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-er@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Intent of ER-XML

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 15:56:25 +0100
Cc: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>, "public-xml-er@w3.org" <public-xml-er@w3.org>
Message-Id: <47E05C89-84F7-4058-8932-E3539B39046D@berjon.com>
To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
On Feb 26, 2012, at 19:52 , Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
> On 2/26/2012 11:16 AM, David Lee wrote:
>> B) Wrong Question XML-ER specs do not define a 'Processor'
>> 3) XML-ER does not define an implementation of anything.  Rather it defines
>> a set of rules for fixing up XML.
> This is pretty much my answer, though I'd prefer to say something like "it's a set of rules for mapping an input document to an output tree, with the following specific requirements:

It's very much possible that I'm being dumb and missing an important distinction here but I'm having a hard time figuring out how we could define a mapping from an input document to an output tree that would be all of interoperable, usable, and not a processor. Can someone please illuminate me?

Or are we having the old XML "syntax vs data model" debate *again*? If so please tell me, I think I still have some emails stocked up for that permathread, need to check the good-by date on them ;)

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Coming up soon: I'm teaching a W3C online course on Mobile Web Apps
Received on Monday, 27 February 2012 14:56:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:47:26 UTC