- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:27:18 -0700
- To: public-procmodel-comments@w3.org
Regarding the 05 April 2004 draft of the XML Processing Model Requirements: why is this effort limited to XML? I don't see any requirements here that rule out other types of input and output; indeed, there are scenarios where it's easy to imagine others (e.g., multipart MIME, gzip, plain text, pdf, png, etc.). Basing the format's input and output on an XML abstraction seems needlessly restrictive. Also, since it's likely we're going to see at least one alternate representation of XML [1], there isn't much gained in terms of simplicity; by specifying the input and output at the data model level, you don't get much in the way of constraint on the syntactic form of the input. There are also some fascinating potential tie-ins with HTTP's processing model [2]. If there's a concern about implementation complexity for the purposes of demonstrating interoperability, the CR requirements could be defined only over a subset of formats that happen to be XML-based. As a result, I'd suggest changing the name of this document to "Web Document Processing Model Requirements," and adjusting the content accordingly. Doing so would be much more in line with the W3C's mission - to lead the Web (and not just XML) to its full potential. 1. http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/3/06/Attachments/XOP.html 2. http://www2002.org/CDROM/refereed/444/ -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2004 16:37:59 UTC