• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: xml-dev@x...
• Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:24:47 -0400

At 04:12 PM 8/2/00 -0400, Schlesinger, John (CICG - Direct Markets) wrote:
>I think this may be going a little too far, especially when I read in the
>Common XML - Final Review Draft Specification, 27 July 2000:
>
>"Documents created using the core Common XML feature set should always
>present the same information set when processed by a non-validating parser
>that conforms to the XML 1.0 specification, and should present consistent
>information in both namespace-aware and non-namespace aware environments."
>
>Of course, I could be making the mistake of equating 'information set' with
>'Infoset' - but surely 'information set' is contained within the 'whole idea
>of the Infoset' even if it isn't contained in 'Infoset'...

I've already replied to this - see:
http://www.egroups.com/message/xml-dev/22553

You might also enjoy Rick Jelliffe's reply:
http://www.egroups.com/message/xml-dev/22557

I have no objects to subsetting XML.  I do have objections to subsetting
the abstract representation of XML without subsetting XML itself.  

Is the Infoset about XML 1.0+Namespaces, or is it about something else?
I'd much prefer that it be about XML 1.0+Namespaces, unless the W3C wants
to talk about Common XML.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Common XML - Final Review Draft
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: [ANN] Update: XSLT-Tool and Installer
• Next by Date: RE: Why the Infoset?
• Previous by thread: [ANN] Update: XSLT-Tool and Installer
• Next by thread: Re: Common XML - Final Review Draft
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread