cowan at locke.ccil.org
Fri Jan 22 15:33:01 GMT 1999
Matthew Sergeant (EML) wrote:
> [Information from notations] doesn't appear (to me) to be any use
> to parsers.
If by "parsers" you mean narrowly what the XML Rec calls "XML
processors, you are quite right. It is meant for the lowest level
of XML applications, just above the parser proper.
> It can be of /some/ use to custom parser code, but only when
> that code has prior knowledge of these notation definitions. And that's a
There has to be such knowledge somewhere. The model of "tag data
of a given type with a magic string" has worked well for MIME;
one advantage of notations is that they allow anybody to standardize
a type, not just IANA.
> Perhaps we need some standard notations?
We do. Lay on, Macduff.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev