W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > March 2011

RE: some comments on the processor profiles draft

From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 14:54:24 -0500
To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1299527664.11652.207.camel@desktop.barefootcomputing.com>
On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 14:24 -0500, Grosso, Paul wrote:

> > Suggest recasting the sentence as
> > [[
> > XML applications are often defined by building on definitions of the
> > output of an XML processor, for example via the XDM [XQuery 1.0 and
> > XPath 2.0 Data Model (XDM)].
> > ]]
> 
> I can't agree to this.
> 
> The processor profiles draft was built on top of the Infoset.
> Perhaps we don't have to say "data model" (though I'm not even
> sure I agree with that point) but it was not built on top of
> the xpath data model, it was built on Infoset, and it's the
> Infoset terminology it continues to use throughout the spec.

I'm happy with keeping infoset there actually, just not with calling
infoset a data model.  An alternative, though, might be to consider
revising the Infoset spec to add text licensing the use of "data model",
and say what it would mean for software (or a spec) to conform to the
Infoset as a data model.  I don't think it would need a whole lot of
text.

(my suggested change was not to add XDM, which was there already, but to
take infoset out only of that particular sentence about data models in
the background section; the spec at hand is supposed to be correcting th
problem the happens when people say, "you take an infoset" (Norm's
fridge, for example...)

Possibly the sentence should also refer to DOM.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 19:54:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 March 2011 19:54:27 GMT