RE: Architectural Forms for MicroXML

Hi John,
 
> Rushforth, Peter scripsit:
> 
> > I'll be particularly interested in how the public schemas are 
> > _referenced_, as well as what format they are in.
> 
> I should really have said "public document types"; there's no 
> requirement that a formal schema be provided or even exist.  
> If we decide to have PIs, then the xml-model PI can be used 
> to refer to a schema from a document claiming to conform to it.
> 
> > I see in your later email you refer to "a source and an _archmap_".
> > Is the archmap component found in-line, or by reference?
> 
> The relation of archmaps to source documents will often be 
> many-to-many.
> That is, a source document may be mapped, using multiple 
> archmaps, to different target documents.  Consequently, it's 
> unclear that any such direct linkage between documents and 
> archmaps should be defined.
> Alternatively, the xml-style PI (if we have PIs) could be used.

That would be a wasted opportunity to define global hypermedia affordance support, and thus improve the self-contained-ness of MicroXML.

> 
> > > Few XML documents are on the web, though many documents 
> on the web 
> > > are generated from XML documents.
> >
> > Another way of putting that is:
> >
> > Many resources on the web should have an XML representation because 
> > they are generated from XML.
> 
> "Should" is an open question.  Some do, most don't; it's up 
> to the publisher of the document.

Agree; if you choose to hide the semantics of your resources from applications, putting them in HTML-only is a good way.  But, then again, there's a big movement of putting semantics in HTML via various means.  The architecture of the web is designed such that the resource-representation model allows a clean separation.  But, should you decide to make the semantics of your content available to applications, XML is a good way.  I thought MicroXML was about helping off-load the semantic overloading of HTML.  Perhaps I was wrong.





> 
> > I'm a user of XML, and potentially MicroXML.  What would be the 
> > intended client of a MicroXML document?
> 
> I don't know.  Someone who finds full XML overkill for their 
> purposes, whatever those purposes might be.

I think the point here is: _what_ would be the application which consumed a MicroXML document, not who.  


Peter

Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2012 12:14:26 UTC