- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:00:30 -0400
- To: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
- Cc: "public-microxml (public-microxml@w3.org)" <public-microxml@w3.org>
David Lee scripsit: > So: If the XML and uXML data models are not intended to be subsets > or interchangeable ... where do you perceive the value of the syntax > being a subset ? Is this purely a familiarity issue (for example xmlsh > syntax is largely compatible with bash - for familiarity reasons only) I already pointed this out upthread: by keeping the syntax a subset, you don't need a MicroXML parser that can deliver the XML data model; any XML parser will do the job. It's true that MicroXML doesn't require namespace declarations, but I would expect that people who use prefixes would also supply declarations. -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org We want more school houses and less jails; more books and less arsenals; more learning and less vice; more constant work and less crime; more leisure and less greed; more justice and less revenge; in fact, more of the opportunities to cultivate our better natures. --Samuel Gompers
Received on Monday, 13 August 2012 19:00:52 UTC