RE: [xml-dev] XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too hard for Aunt Trudie?

At 11:48 AM -0400 4/21/04, Bob Wyman wrote:

>	One problem: SAX isn't Infoset. Thus, there are some
>limitations to your mappings that might have been better addressed by
>mapping to Infoset. Ideally, SAX would map to Infoset as well and thus
>give you the mapping to and from XML or any other syntax derived from
>Infoset. However, the SAX and Infoset discussion is yet another
>permathread that we probably shouldn't open up in this context...

Actually, it's much, much worse than that:

SAX != Infoset != XML != SAX

Mapping to either SAX or the Infoset does not guarantee a mapping to 
XML. An alternative syntax for XML needs to define a mapping to XML, 
not to higher level abstractions of XML. The assumption that there is 
some higher level model than XML itself which these alternative 
syntaxes can map to is the clay foot at the base of many alternative 
syntax edifices.

-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   
   Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA