• To: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>
• Subject: Re: The subsetting has begun
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:49:31 +0000
• Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>, "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <clbullar@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• References: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F804B54D2C@R...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Dare Obasanjo wrote:

> Agreed. However API designers especially those that would like to enable
> the implementation of virtual XML documents and XML views are better
> served by basing their work on the infoset than on the XML 1.0 syntax.  

Sure thing. But we'd be all well served not muddying XML with XML 
Infosets.

Bill de hÓra

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • RE: The subsetting has begun
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by Date: re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????
• Previous by thread: RE: The subsetting has begun
• Next by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread