Dave Cridland wrote: > On Wed Aug 15 17:40:22 2007, Ian Paterson wrote: >> Greg Hudson wrote: >>> A generic XML editor isn't going to know much about the semantics of the >>> document it is editing. It's not necessarily going to be a good >>> framework for a whiteboarding application, any more than emacs is a good >>> foundation for Photoshop. They both edit files, but... >>> >> >> > [...] > > >> I would have thought that, a *very low level* synchronised XML editing >> protocol suitable for SVG documents could be very similar to, for >> example, one for XHTML documents. >> >> 1. What significant differences do people see between two such >> *lowest* level protocols? >> 2. Could those differences be optional parts of a single low-level >> protocol? >> 3. What specific real-world disadvantages do people see if we use a >> single low level building-block protocol? > > I have to say, my suspicion is that these kinds of questions would be > far easier to answer if we developed an SVG protocol and an XHTML > protocol, then looked for points of similarity. Trying to create an > abstract protocol out of nowhere is going to be tricky, and as Greg > suggested, quite possibly it'll go nowhere.
Quite possibly. :) And yes it would be good to have two or more examples from which to abstract. SVG and XHTML are probably good candidates. > In particular, I'd welcome the Council reinstating We can't "reinstate" something that has not yet been published. :) > the SVG XEP Which one? We have: 1. http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sxde.html plus http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/whiteboard.html 2. http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/whiteboard2.html > as an > experimental protocol, Unlike the IETF, we don't have the concept of an "Experimental" spec. The closest we come is Informational specs. More here: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0001.html#types We could always add another XEP type if needed, though. > and encouraging people to consider the XHTML > case. I'd suggest attempting the latter by considering adaptations of > the SVG spec to handle XHTML instead, then consider how to re-unify > them, but even a wholly distinct effort would go a long way to getting a > unified XML realtime collaborative editing protocol done. +1 Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
