- From: Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:31:47 -0800
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> We don't think that the mechanism for serializing an arbitrary > sequence described in section 2 of the Serialization specification > meets any known user requirement. I think there is a need for "human-readable" serialization, which does not necessarily have to be reversible. Consider exploratory entering query expressions to a processor, and getting a serialized result back. If I type: 1 to 5 I might expect: 1 2 3 4 5 or: 1 2 3 4 5 but I would not want or expect: <res:atomic type="xs:integer" value="1"/> <res:atomic type="xs:integer" value="2"/> <res:atomic type="xs:integer" value="3"/> <res:atomic type="xs:integer" value="4"/> <res:atomic type="xs:integer" value="5"/> I might want type annotations: 1 : xs:integer 2 : xs:integer 3 : xs:integer 4 : xs:integer 5 : xs:integer or: (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) : xs:integer* but only if it is optional. Similarly, emitting an xs:string with quotes makes it easier to see what is going on and to read it back in again. However, emitting it without quotes allows the programming to construct arbitrary formatted output. For example: "The sum is: ", sum($vals), ".&nl;" (Aside: a "new-line" predefined entity would be very useful.) There is also a need for an "interoperable" serialization, which might give the result using special elements as Michael Kay suggests. But that is a separate goal. The Lisp world has long distinguished "readable" output, where (for example) string and symbols are emitted with quotes, so the output is a valid "S-expression" that can be read back in again, vs "display" or "non-readable" output which is used for output meant to be read by a human, and if you want quotes you have to write them explicitly. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
Received on Sunday, 30 November 2003 17:31:38 UTC