Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Alessandro Triglia wrote: > > I am not asserting that all producers of XML fit the above description, but > I like thinking that a lot of them do. Otherwise, it would be hard to > understand the significance of the XML infoset, the significance of SAX, the > significance of XML Schema, etc. The XML infoset is important, isn't it? No, I don't think it is. Outside of the small community of spec writers and some implementers, it's hard to think of anybody who really cares about or even understands the XML infoset. Developers care about the data models exposed by DOM, SAX, XPath, etc. The infoset doesn't enter into it. The infoset was too late out of the gate to have any real effect. If it had been part of the XML 1.0 spec it might have mattered. However, since it postdated XML, XPath, DOM, and many other specs by years, it's effect has been negligible. That it is neither a proper superset nor a proper subset of the information content of an XML 1.0 document has not helped either. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@m... XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
|
