- From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 05:06:52 -0700
- To: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@topologi.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
What you are proposing is an alternative mechanism not a renamed PSVI. The PSVI is an intrinsic aspect of the W3C XML Schema recommendation. A TAI as has been discussed on this thread could be thought of as a generic typed XML data model similar to that of the XQuery/XPath 2.0 data model. -- PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM Any philosophy that can be put into a nutshell belongs there. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:ricko@topologi.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 2:03 AM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: RE: Potential new issue: PSVI considered harmful > > > > I agree with Tim Bray (and perhaps Noah Mendelson, in part) > that the PSVI should be renamed. > > * First because it may not be PSV, as he says. > > * Second because it does not have a relationship-preserving > re-serialization to XML (except of course by stripping out > the augmentations and requiring validation again) and therefore > is non-XML. PSVI does not draw out this discontinuity enough. > > * Third because "Schema" is a codeword for W3C XML Schemas, but other > schema languages could be used. > > I think "Type-augmented Infoset" could be improved, though, > because it is not just that there is additional information > added to some notional XML information set, > it is that there are non-XML information items added. The > XML Information Set > spec generally uses "Information Item" to mean an instance > rather than a type, so "augmented" is not very satisfactory. > I suggest just "Typed InfoSet." > > > Cheers > Rick Jelliffe > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2002 08:07:26 UTC