- From: Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:17:51 +0000
- To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- CC: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2006 19:18:28 UTC
Alex Milowski wrote: > > > This is very tempting. I don't think our discussion of a design > principle based on infosets and their extensions precludes this. > > I also think we have a requirement to support XDM. > > In the end, if we end up with a specification for pipelines > that says "we use XDM between components", I don't think we violate our > design principle. > > After another reading pass through the first draft of requirements and use cases, I've check that from the 28 use cases listed, I've counted, at least, 8 use cases (correct me if I'm wrong) that directly need pipeline support from an augmented data model. These use cases mainly address HTML and text files (de)serialization issues, and the XQuery/RelaxNG factors. Do we want to support these use cases? Or should they be discarded/postponed? As XDM can provide support for these use cases, I say "support XDM". Rui
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2006 19:18:28 UTC