[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Attributes vs. text content

• From: "John Tigue" <john.tigue@t...>
• To: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:04:19 -0700

joubin@i... wrote:
|   Consider:
|   
|   <?xml version="1.0"?>
|   <methodCall type="asynchronous">
|      <methodName>xmlbased.cgi.named.foo<methodName>
|        // .. etc.
|   </methodCall>
|   
|     v.s.
|   
|   <?xml version="1.0"?>
|   <methodCall>
|      </asynchronous>
|      <methodName>xmlbased.cgi.named.foo<methodName>
|        // .. etc.
|   </methodCall>


Wouldn't that be:

<?xml?>
  <?version?>1.0<?/version?>

<methodCall>
   </asynchronous>
   <methodName>xmlbased.cgi.named.foo<methodName>
     // .. etc.
</methodCall>


or are pseudo-attibutes ok?


/John

--
John Tigue
john.tigue@t...
http://www.tigue.com



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Attributes vs. text content
    • From: "Erik James Freed" <ejfreed@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RFC: Attributes and XML-RPC
• Next by Date: Re: Attributes vs. text content
• Previous by thread: XHTML and the Three Namespaces
• Next by thread: RE: Attributes vs. text content
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread