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

Re: canonicalization

• To: veillard@r...
• Subject: Re: canonicalization
• From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>
• Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:24:32 +1100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• Organization: Allette Systems (Australia) Pty Ltd
• References: <1015032338.3309.3.camel@l...> <p04330103b8a7fd271d04@[192.168.254.4]> <1015178176.5268.43.camel@l...> <p04330104b8a8106aa395@[192.168.254.4]> <1015193078.3350.61.camel@l...> <p04330107b8a85bc15730@[192.168.254.4]> <1015201142.3309.108.camel@l...> <3C82B747.5020609@t...> <20020304025635.C18835@r...> <3C832B1E.2D941BB6@a...> <20020304043305.D18835@r...>

Daniel Veillard wrote:

> Consider a large doc splitted into chapter. The resulting document
> is built with XInclude. Each subdocument can contain a DOCTYPE and
> be validated independantly.

Doing this with entities, I'd generate a document comprised of entity
references, and create the subdocuments with DOCTYPEs. I'd validate the
subdocuments independantly, creating the files that matched my entity
references. I understand that with XInclude I could use the subdocuments
directly (after validation) rather than first generating an output file
(without DOCTYPE) from each subdocument - is that the only gain in this
scenario?


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mcarr@a...
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>

• References:
  • canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Marcus Carr <mcarr@a...>
  • Re: canonicalization
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Namespaces and URIs (was: A good case for Namespace URIs)
• Next by Date: Re: Namespaces and URIs (was: A good case for Namespace URIs)
• Previous by thread: Re: canonicalization
• Next by thread: Re: canonicalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread