- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 14:25:29 -0400
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Norm: I'm curious about a few things. Have you given any thought to the XML 1.0/XML 1.1 issue as it relates to your writeup. As best I can tell, Infoset has no formal notion of the distinction, but implies that if a (non-synthetic) Infoset resulting from the parse of an actual serialized document results in a [version] property on the document information item, then that version applies in some sense to all descendants. There is no conformance rule relating to the possibility that, for example, element names would in fact be consistent with the apparent version. I can also see no indication that versions must be applied consistently in the case that a synthetic infoset is constructed. I'm not particularly advocating one answer or another, but I think it would be useful to verify that a) Two document info items that differ only in [version] are or or not equal? b) Is it even meaningful to compare two elements taken out of the context of their enclosing documents. I believe it's fair to say that the Infoset rec is silent as to whether such things can exist or be dealt with in isolation; I note that the schema recommendation currently claims to validate element info items and doesn't mention document info items one way or the other. We are in fact debating whether it is sensible to imply that one can invariably walk up to some document info item ancestor to determine an XML version. Anyway, in whatever way it is meaningful to compare element info items "out of context", we need to decide whether XML versions enter into the equation, and how that relates to our story at the document info item level. Thank you very much. -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2004 14:29:23 UTC