- From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 13:12:46 -0400
- To: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
- Cc: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>, "stephengreenubl@gmail.com" <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>, Maik Stührenberg <maik.stuehrenberg@uni-bielefeld.de>, "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
David Lee scripsit:
> Note I am distinguishing between "parser" and "processor" I suggest
> there are valid and conformance roles for both. And they are quite
> different.
Historically these terms have always meant the same thing in the SGML/XML
world. But if you want to distinguish them, fine; the abstract data
model and MicroXML conformance pertain only to parsers.
> Current wc(1) probably isn't uf8 aware so wouldn't count.
The GNU, BSD, and Solaris versions definitely are, provided you set the
locale correctly.
> Why is a program that produces the output I want being considered
> conformant absurd ?
It's absurd to suppose that a Fortran compiler conforms to C. The fact
that you want to compile Fortran has nothing to do with that judgement.
Similarly, programs can process MicroXML without needing to be conformant
parsers.
--
Eric Raymond is the Margaret Mead John Cowan
of the Open Source movement. cowan@ccil.org
--Bruce Perens, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
some years ago
Received on Monday, 1 October 2012 17:13:15 UTC