- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 15:56:25 +0100
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Cc: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>, "public-xml-er@w3.org" <public-xml-er@w3.org>
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 http://www.w3devcampus.com/writing-great-web-applications-for-mobile/
Received on Monday, 27 February 2012 14:56:52 UTC