Re: revised text and diagram

Hi folks,

Sorry not to have replied sooner, Dave - it felt like it deserved more than a quick response from my phone, and since then... the day job, you know how it goes!
> ? No mention of the main (user) input file... text ... string...
> something? 'ixml user input'? Without suffix 'file' it reads oddly?
> ixml input text stream? How does that sound.
I'm OK with "input text" and I can live with "input text stream," although I think it does risk confusion with XSLT streaming in 3.0; If I'd have gotten there first, I would probably have suggested something like "textual input, for example from a string value or text file".

For some context, I remember at the last XML London, Jirka Kosek giving an excellent talk on the applicability of Invisible XML to things like SVG paths, which are held in SVG attribute values; I think he was checking them with Schematron to ensure they didn't draw outside a given area, or similar.  That's a good example of parsing some string data that is not presented as a file.
> The ixml grammar shall be represented in ixml format, valid to the ixml spec.
> Seems to cover it
Agreed: the XML version is simply the iXML grammar applied to itself.  That fact itself is discussed in the spec, too.
> AFAIK (Michael, Tom?) an external file for pragmas is not on the cards? So
> - ixml Pragmas may be included as part of the ixml grammar

Agreed.

Thanks both,

Tom

_________________
Tomos Hillman
eXpertML Ltd
+44 7793 242058
On 13 Jan 2022, 12:34 +0000, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>, wrote:
> Comments inline
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 11:51, Bethan Tovey-Walsh <accounts@bethan.wales> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder whether something like this might help with Tom’s objections? (Dave, I apologise in advance if I’ve made any awful errors in this tentative rewrite):
> >
> > ## ixml inputs
> > -
> > - The ixml grammar may [or must?] be represented in ixml format, valid to the ixml spec, or in an XML version.
> > - The ixml grammar may (optionally) be modified by pragmas.
> > - Pragmas can be included as part of the ixml grammar input, or be passed as an additional input to the ixml processor (for example by way of an ixml pragma file).
>
> DP
>
> ixml inputs.
>
> - ixml uses an ixml grammar to process a string and output a
> structured representation of the content of that string;
> (Not an input? More an overview statement)
> - The ixml grammar shall be represented in ixml format, valid to the
> ixml spec, or in an XML version.
> (I assume the xml version of an ixml grammar will be defined in the
> spec, or referenced therefrom). So
> The ixml grammar shall be represented in ixml format, valid to the ixml spec.
> Seems to cover it (no mention of files or XDM etc).
> - Pragmas may be included as part of the ixml grammar, or be passed
> as an additional input to the ixml processor (for example by way of an
> ixml pragma file).
>
> ? No mention of the main (user) input file... text ... string...
> something? 'ixml user input'? Without suffix 'file' it reads oddly?
> ixml input text stream? How does that sound.
>
>
> AFAIK (Michael, Tom?) an external file for pragmas is not on the cards? So
> - ixml Pragmas may be included as part of the ixml grammar
>
>
>
> >
> > ## ixml processor
> >
> > - An application taking as input an ixml grammar, (optionally) one or more ixml pragmas, and a string.
> > - Its task is to validate the input string against the grammar, and (if valid) to produce the ixml output according to the rules of the grammar.
> > - The processor may act on zero or more of the input pragmas (regardless of the manner in which these are input). Specifically, it may ignore those which it is unable to process.
>
> DP
> ## ixml processor
> - An application taking as input an ixml grammar, (optionally) one or
> more ixml pragmas, and a string.
> I'm guessing someone would object to string (same rationale as files), so
> - An application taking as input an ixml grammar, (optionally) ixml
> pragmas, and an ixml text stream?
> (but here we're defining the processor, can we omit any reference to
> its inputs, already defined? KISS principle? Omit?
> - - Its task is to validate the input text stream against an ixml
> grammar, and (if valid) to produce the ixml output according to the
> rules of the grammar.
>
>
> I'm happy with that?
>
> Tks Bethan.
>
> --
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> Docbook FAQ.
>