XML Editor - Download a Free Trial >
See What's New >
Buy Now >

[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]

  • From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@N...>
  • To: David Lee <dlee@c...>, "xml-dev@l..."<xml-dev@l...>
  • Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 14:57:03 +0000

David,

>I would hope so otherwise MicroXML will have to stay its own island like JSON.  In which case why even bother making it look like XML?

Exactly.  Simplify XML, via a profile.  "Full, fat XML" is still necessary, and useful.  Simplified XML could work where XML itself might not be a good fit.  What goes in the profile?  The minimum possible.  It should be backwards compatible, though, so XQuery and XSLT can work with it.

>I admit I have not kept up with the MicroXML "specs" to know if even <foo:bar/> is valid MicroXML ... let alone to consider
how it would be converted to XDM.

I think that just eliminating <foo:bar/> in favour of <bar/> would work.


>But this latest series of discussions has me interested.

Me too.

Peter
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

XML Editor - Download a 15 Day Free Trial Now >
See What's New in Stylus Studio >
Buy Stylus Studio - XML Editor - Now >
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member