Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 02:07 PM 5/5/2003 -0700, Joe English wrote:
>That's precisely why I won't bother submitting any feedback:
>it would just make more work for the WG. Obviously *somebody*
>wants the PSVI, otherwise it wouldn't keep creeping into
>everything. No amount of informed dissent is going to get
>it removed, so why bother? No, I'll just vote with my feet
>on this one.
Let's be clear: the PSVI is not in the XQuery Data Model. Nobody wanted the
PSVI in the data model, there's a lot of stuff in the PSVI that we don't
need, and it's defined at the wrong level.
Named types are in the Data Model, which may represent merely well-formed
XML documents, DTD-validated documents, or W3C XML Schema-validated
documents. The Data Model may be constructed from a PSVI, an Infoset, or
out of the blue.
The Data Model document is in Last Call, and can be found here:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel/
I think it's reasonably simple and well-designed. It's also a reasonably
short document. It does not say that a Data Model Instance contains the
PSVI. This document is also in Last Call, so it's a particularly strategic
one to read and give feedback on.
Jonathan
|
