- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:39:46 +0700
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 01:40:34 UTC
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> wrote: > opening > up the data model has repercussions that are not impossible or even > necessarily hard to specify but don't just automatically happen without > specification as there are choices that need to be made. I agree you can find cases (particularly in XSD-based specifications) that would become unspecified if the data model is relaxed. In practice, I don't think these are a big deal. XML 1.0 5th edition introduces very similar issues (when used with specs based on pre-5th edition XML 1.0), and the world has not collapsed. HTML lives with a very similar situation: you can have HTML DOMs that cannot be serialized using the HTML syntax. I think the most helpful way to deal with these issues is to provide an optional fixup stage that can be used in the rare situations where a relaxed data model causes practical problems. James
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 01:40:34 UTC