logo       

RE: Potential new issue: PSVI considered harmful: msg#00126

org.w3c.tag

Subject: RE: Potential new issue: PSVI considered harmful


I agree with Tim Bray (and perhaps Noah Mendelson, in part) that the PSVI should
be renamed.

* First because it may not be PSV, as he says.

* Second because it does not have a relationship-preserving re-serialization to
XML (except
of course by stripping out the augmentations and requiring validation again)
and therefore
is non-XML. PSVI does not draw out this discontinuity enough.

* Third because "Schema" is a codeword for W3C XML Schemas, but other
schema languages could be used.

I think "Type-augmented Infoset" could be improved, though, because it is
not just that there is additional information added to some notional XML
information set,
it is that there are non-XML information items added. The XML Information Set
spec generally uses "Information Item" to mean an instance rather than a type,
so
"augmented" is not very satisfactory. I suggest just "Typed InfoSet."


Cheers
Rick Jelliffe







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Google Custom Search

News | FAQ | advertise