- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 02:12:21 -0500
- To: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Cc: Michael Sokolov <sokolov@falutin.net>, liam@w3.org, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>, "public-microxml (public-microxml@w3.org)" <public-microxml@w3.org>
James Clark scripsit: > Note that this data model is intended to be useful not just for MicroXML. > For example, it can also be used to represent XML or HTML documents. > When the data model results from parsing a MicroXML document, it will > satisfy the following restrictions: [snipped] On reflection, I think that this is the wrong way around. The model should be defined in terms of what MicroXML allows, so that every valid data model corresponds to some MicroXML documents (there will always be more than one such document because of lexical variants, comments, etc.) Then, at the end, something like: This data model can be extended to be useful for types of documents besides MicroXML by removing the restrictions specified in the last two paragraphs. -- What is the sound of Perl? Is it not the John Cowan sound of a [Ww]all that people have stopped cowan@ccil.org banging their head against? --Larry http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 07:12:53 UTC