W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Component proposals

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:08:18 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <87abwxlhel.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh wrote:
|> I propose that we rename p:serialize to p:escape-markup and
|> p:parse to p:unescape-markup.
| +1
|> I propose that we add an optional p:serialize component that
|> implements XSLT 2.0/XQuery 1.0 Serialization.
|> I propose that we rename p:store to p:save and describe it as
|> implementing XSLT 1.0 Serialization.
| I assume that p:store currently doesn't do HTTP PUT, and that the URIs
| must be relative or use the file:// scheme? If so, then changing its
| name to p:save is OK by me. If not (i.e. the implementation is free to
| attempt to store the document through whatever method is appropriate),
| then the more generic name is better.

I think it would be ok if the component attempted to store things at
http: URIs, so perhaps we should keep its name as p:store.

| I'm not keen on having p:save do XSLT 1.0 serialisation and
| p:serialize do XSLT 2.0/XQuery 1.0 serialisation. The names should
| make it clear that they do the same thing just have different sets of
| options. So p:save(1) and p:save2 would be better IMO.

I agree about the names. I think there are three things on the table:

1. A component, 'banana', that simply serializes XML.

2. A component, 'apricot', that is capable of serializing either XML
   or HTML. And at that point, it might as well be capable of dealing
   with the semantics of XSLT 1.0 because (a) that's not a
   significantly greater burden and we can point to a spec we know is
   widely implemented.

3. A component, 'peach', that has all the flexibility of XSLT 2.0

The 'banana' and 'apricot' components are required, 'peach' is optional.

Should 'banana' and 'apricot' be the same component? Is there any
value in splitting the only serialize XML functionality into a
separate component?

What should the two or three components in question be named?

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | First time surrealists are often
http://nwalsh.com/            | confused by the similarities between
                              | fish and telephones.

Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 19:08:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:42 UTC