Re: [SML] Whether to support Attribute or not?
> > > > Because avoiding the difference between attributes and elements > > simplifyes the addressing and *every* realted API ( Xpath, Xslt, DOM, > > XQL e t.c. ) a *lot* + it avoids 'multiple levels of encoding' problems > e t.c. > > > > That seems like the best reason to remove attributes from "SML" to me too. > A couple of potential downsides ... > > If SML parsers don't recognize attributes, then we can't have an SML-ized > XHTML. Does anyone care? How about WML? I for one would care if WML was > incompatible with SML ... We have a huge 'legacy' problem with attributes. I suggest to solve the legacy problems in the way they are solved in general. SML <-> XML-format-with-attributes converter, or especial layer e t.c, but *not* the changes to SML layer. > How about XSLT? It would be nice if stylesheets to turn SML into something > displayable were themselves parseable as SML. I'm pretty sure that you > couldn't write a useful XSLT stylesheet without using attributes .... <aside> S-XSLT should be written anyway. XT will hardly fit into cell phone ;-) S-XSLT processor should be much easier to write than it was to write XT ( the same is with SML parser, S-SAX, e t.c.): 1. All inventions are already in place ;-) 2. All that is needed is 'bugfixing' the existing design in some places. 3. 'Bugfixing' could often be 'throw away'. </aside> However, at the first step ( on server side ;-) SML files could be processed by XSLT processor, because SML is XML - no big problem here. > I'm inclined to allow attributes in SML itself but to have a "non-normative > appendix" that is a fairly integral part of the document explaining that > attributes are supported only for compatibility reasons and discouraging > people from using them in "new" SML applications and outlining the various > attribute-related pitfalls to avoid. I think it is bad idea. "We give you this feature but you should not use it". I think it's better not to give that feature at all, because ... Because it'l not force us to write S-XSLT, for example. And because I think that it would be always possible to solve some legacy problem with especial mapping layer ( using XT, for example ) to go from SML to *ML, like people are doing now, utilizing some SGML tools with XML At the moment there is simply no solid XML-ish way to render the XML documents to different media. I think mostly people are utilizing SGML-ish tools for such a task, 'converting' XML to SGML. I don't understand why can't we do the same with SML, converting it to XML ( with belowed attributes ;-). Should be *very* easy with XT, right ? Rgds.Paul. 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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format