Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Jonathan Borden wrote: > Let me rephrase your objection: You are (correctly) objecting to the > development of an XML grove plan (XML Infoset) in the absense of the > specification of the XML property set. If anyone thinks that an XML property set distinct from the ISO SGML Property Set ought to exist, I most heartily urge him to put his money (and time, and blood, and sweat) where his mouth is. "Take my job....please!" As things stand, I have an imperfect-but-usable approximation that omits many things irrecoverably. > What we need is a common language for the specification of XML subsets > (grove plans), from the full fidelity XML property set. I think the idea of creating a formalism for specifying subsets of the Infoset is a very plausible one, and if the Infoset ever gets out the door I will think about the problem. -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@r...> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
|
