Re: Terminology proposals

> "I like "visible XML", but less enamoured of "vxml", since it makes it
> sound like it is some special version of XML. I think it should just
> be "XML" (and it's the only place where XML is involved, as output).

I think we’re going to get into conversations surrounding what actually
gets serialized by the processor and what relationship it has to ixml
processing. Consider, for example, serializing the result as JSON or
serializing XML elaborated with a default namespace declaration. I think
implementations are going to support both of those features.

If we have a term for “the output of the ixml process” as distinct from
“the output of the processor”, those conversations might be easier.

Conformance, I’m imagining, would be at the “visible XML” layer.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norm Tovey-Walsh
Saxonica