- From: Sean Mc Grath <sean@digitome.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 05:09:39 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-dom@w3.org
[Stephen R. Savitzky] > >The XML specification, like the DOM, like SGML, only covers the behavior of >an application that _reads_ a document, converts it into a parse tree, and >does something with the tree, such as rendering it on a screen. To such an >application, only the data matters, and the specifications are very clear >about what does and does not matter to such an application. This is not true for SGML in which a vast edifice of data abstraction (groves / property sets) make it feasible - in principle - for an application to specify what is and is not of interest. A sufficiently comprehensive SGML property set would allow an application to perform a null transformation. i.e. a complete recreation byte-for-byte of what was originally parsed. Using this approach, the fabled ESIS (Element Structure Information Set) becomes one example of an SGML Property Set. It handles structure-sensitive apps well, but does not handle markup-sensitive apps well. That is to say, it makes a good information set for down-translation but a bad information set for cross-translation. The DOM necessarily throws some stuff away that markup sensitive applications might be interested in. Heck, even XML parsers throw some stuff away! If you really need such fine grained access to the original XML instances then the DOM is not the tool for you and I would suggest you investigate groves and property sets. [...] >In particular, I expect an application that transforms documents to be >capable of implementing the null transform. Putting it another way, I >expect "diff" applied to the input and output documents to show me exactly >what I told the application to change, and nothing else. > >I don't think that's so very unreasonable, do you? Yes. I think it is unreasonable because it would complicate the DOM for everyone. You and I *transform* XML more than we down-translate it. That puts us into a minority. A minority that the DOM is not pitched at. I would love to have access to tools capapable of doing XML null transformations. No such beast exists to my knowledge. James Clarks SP parser can build a grove for you and you can access it on Windows via COM but is not a 100% compliant XML parser. For a large class of XML documents that I work with the "copy" command provides a workable null transformation:-) regards, <Sean uri="http://www.digitome.com/sean.html"> Developers Day co-Chair WWW9, April 2000, Amsterdam <uri>http://www.www9.org</uri> </Sean>
Received on Thursday, 7 October 1999 05:45:26 UTC