Michael Kay wrote:
>>> There is no standard or even 'community accepted' way of
>>>
>> serializing XDM
>>
>
>
>> What is wrong with JSON for this?
>>
>
> Nearly everything, starting with the fact that the target user community is
> likely to want something that can be manipulated using XML tools.
>
I think this may be shifting the goal post. The JSON can be reimported
into the XDM-aware tools. Non-XDM tools will need extra programming to
cope with the unknown semantics and type annotation information in the
XDM-in-XML dump in any case.
> In fact, what is right with JSON for this?
>
It has sequences (arrays) which was the problem being complained of. It
can be exported into XDM and imported back, with minimal conventions. It
has explicit types.
>> The XPath2 data model is a system for *converting* XML into
>> programming language types, or for operating on a kind of XSD
>> PSVI.
>>
>
> That's not how I would define it (and it's not how the spec defines it). In
> fact, I don't really see where conversion into "programming language types"
> comes into it at all.
>
s/system for/part of a system for/
XML Infoset != XDM. Therefore a conversion is needed. Hence XSD and
XSLT2 (not exhausting all their serried splendours by saying they are
limited to this conversion.)
Cheers
Rick
