- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 10:00:17 -0700
- To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I recall that one of the use cases we considered (don't remember if it got through or not) would be use of 'pared-down' XML for use by small devices (hope this won't start the debate over the meaning of 'devices' again ;) It seems that using Infoset would enable this - those wishing to use such a subset would define its relationship to the Infoset, and use that simplified serialization instead. On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 11:38:06AM -0400, Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote: > Rich Salz writes: > > >> In particular, the idea of "describe the > >> abstract data" and then "describe > >> particular syntax in detail" scares > >> me. > > Good, I think we have the right issues on the table now. I think we both > agree on what is possible and why, and now it's a question of whether the > extra layer of abstraction clouds or clarifies the implementations that > people will be building. > > For me, it is a little hard to reason about certain forms of compressed or > otherwise optimized XML without reference to the Infoset. It's quite > reasonable in that case to assume that at no place in the implementation, > from API (e.g. DOM) to bits on the wire, did the "<" exist. For that > reason, I think I find it more straightforward to reason about the > Infoset. I think I am reading you to say: look, this Infoset stuff is > very abstract when an implementor is trying to figure out what belongs on > the wire, keep it simple and direct. > > If I have understood you correctly, I think those are two reasonable > positions to have on the table for comparison. Although I lean toward > Infoset, I don't think the choice is entirely obvious. The arguments > against definitely include the ones you give. Thank you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 2 July 2001 13:00:35 UTC