W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2001

Re: Infoset based rewrite of SOAP Section 4

From: Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@propylon.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 11:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
At 11:06 02/07/2001 -0400, Rich Salz wrote:
>I disagree that the infoset is the best approach.  I
>believe it's a bad idea.  In particular, the idea of "describe the
>abstract data" and then "describe particular syntax in detail" scares
>me.  It makes me think of the old 7layer model.  Or describing a stream
>protocol in ASN.1 and then saying "the transfer syntax is DER, and we'll
>call that binding TCP."
>It is possible to do things that way, but it makes it needlessly
>difficult for <emphasize-my-viewpoint>implementors</emph>
>         /r$

Unfortunately, given the data-model-free nature of XML 1.0 and the
hairy complexity of fully-blown post-parse XML 1.0, abstract
infoset approaches are probably unavoidable - unless one goes
for commonXML, microXML or so other syntactic restriction of
XML 1.0.

The resultant complexity is unfortunate at best <Sigh/>.

Sean McGrath
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 13:04:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:14 UTC