- From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 17:10:57 -0400
- To: "W. E. Perry" <wperry@fiduciary.com>, <xml-uri@w3.org>
W. E. Perry wrote: > Paul Grosso wrote: > > > I hear you, but suppose some Evil Generator Tool creates a document > > that does not comply to the "strict requirement" you want to put on it. > > Then what is my compliant consuming tool supposed to do? > > > > In my understanding, it is precisely the answer to that question that > > we are searching for. > > This is, in fact, precisely the question before us. It seems to me that where > Simon and Henrik have advanced the solution is in their insistence on the > explicit recognition of a 'context' for the understanding of a namespace. At the end of a very long day and discussion :-), what I really want is that my XML documents have the same Infosets whether built by IBM, Microsoft, Sun or whatever other parser. I've gotten used to working around 'defects' in languages, specifications, whatever. What I hate working around are incompatibilities. I prefer the literal approach because it is just that, and the easiest to avoid screwing up. Using a context is the most 'logical' approach assuming you all agree with my definition of the term 'context'. Jonathan Borden http://www.openhealth.org
Received on Friday, 30 June 2000 17:19:38 UTC