David Nickerson wrote: > Andrew Miller wrote: > >> David Nickerson wrote: >> >>> Andrew Miller wrote: >>> >>> >>>> ... >>>> How about CellML Infoset, CellML Model, and Mathematical Model? >>>> >>>> >>> That sounds good to me. While I guess this use of infoset is pretty >>> common in the XML world, it might be useful to refer to the CellML XML >>> Infoset? Or is it safe to assume that people reading the specification >>> have some familiarity with XML concepts? >>> >>> >> I am not sure that having the words XML aid interpretation. Also, there >> has been some work to create alternative, non-XML serialisations of the >> infoset - see Fast Infoset for example, which is on an ITU-T >> standardisation track. We are not talking specifically about the XML >> serialisation in the places where XML Infoset is mentioned (although of >> course XML serialisation is the standard for CellML, anything else would >> be an extension). However, given that the definition of CellML Infoset >> would reference the XML Information Sets specification, I am not sure >> that we really need to repeat XML everywhere. >> > > OK - makes sense to me. >
I have changed this and pushed it to my publicly visible version of the CellML specification (available from my git repository or for casual viewing at http://www.cellml.org/Members/miller/draft-normative-spec/toplevel.xhtml). Best regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
