W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-editor@w3.org > December 2002

RE: FW: XML Query WG Feedback on Sept WD of Namespaces in XML 1.1

From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:32:37 -0800
Message-ID: <5C39F806F9939046B4B1AFE652500A3A039BEA61@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Richard Tobin" <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Cc: "Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, "Kay Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>, "XML Core WG" <w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <w3c-xml-query-wg@w3.org>, <xml-names-editor@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Tobin [mailto:richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 15:23 PM
> To: John Cowan; Michael Rys
> Cc: Paul Grosso; Kay Michael; XML Core WG; w3c-xml-query-wg@w3.org;
> names-editor@w3.org
> Subject: Re: FW: XML Query WG Feedback on Sept WD of Namespaces in XML
> > > 1. XML 1.1 describes a true superset of XML 1.0
> >
> > The set of possible XML 1.1 documents is not quite a superset of the
> > of XML 1.0 documents, but the differences are lexical and don't show
> through
> > at the Infoset level.
> Am I right in thinking that Michael Rys wants it to be a superset
> so that one can always serialize a 1.0 or 1.1 infoset as 1.1?  Rather
> than having to look at the infoset to see what it can be serialized

[Michael Rys] Correct. The main reason is of course that you can query
1.1 infosets using 1.0 query technology and vice versa...

> In any case, I think this is an issue for the revised Infoset spec,
> not XML 1.1 or Namespaces 1.1.

[Michael Rys] Well not quite. If XML 1.1 or Namespaces 1.1 needs to make
sure that their impact on the infoset is not make the above impossible.

One example would be that XML 1.1 would have to be NFC normalized. Then
I cannot take a 1.0 infoset and serialize it as XML 1.1 (and no,
requiring the serialization step to do NFC is not acceptable since
operations on the infoset level would still not be normalized).

Another example would be to limit acceptable name characters
(disregarding the welcome fix of : in names) in 1.1. 

Best regards
> -- Richard
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 18:36:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:48 UTC