Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
David Brownell wrote:
>
> > First came XPath.
> > Then XPointer thought it wise to use XPath.
> > Then XInclude decided to rely on (a slightly extended version of) XPath.
> > Then W3C XML Schema came out with its datatypes.
> > Then XPath saw all the benefit of relying on W3C XML Schema datatypes.
> >
> > So far so good, except that XInclude and W3C XML Schema need now both to
> > be processed first...
>
> That's a good reason to avoid XIncluding URIs with fragment IDs, yes?
Yes... unless these IDs are defined in a DTD!
> So you don't head down the XPath loop. (XInclude uses XPointer in
> such cases, which is what defines the extended XPath.)
>
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2001/07/XMLPM.html
>
> "However, the relationship among all of these W3C specifications is
> unspecified -- in particular the sequence in which the infoset-to-infoset
> transformations may or must be performed."
>
> So there's a workshop to start fixing such holes (next month). One hopes
> that the fix still facilitates significant amounts of work being done by stream
> transforms. CPP has done #includes as stream operations for decades,
> and I'm not sure I see why doing it in XML ought to be different.
I'd like to be under the table ;=) .
Thanks for the pointer.
Eric
> - Dave
--
Pour y voir plus clair dans la nebuleuse XML...
http://dyomedea.com/formation/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
