Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: linking, 80/20
 Paul Prescod <paul@p...> wrote: |> http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200002/msg00609.html | | That's not an *out-of-line* declaration. I assume you're talking about the two PIs at the top. They're necessary just as declaration syntax can be necessary - to explain the markup actually used in the document. | It is inline and intrusive for many of the same reasons namespaces are | intrusive. The only "inline" markup is (possibly) the 'xdc' attribute in my example. With an out-of-line mechanism, yes, such markup wouldn't have been needed in the instance. But there is another important factor here. That multiple taxonomies are simultaneously in scope is ultimately a feature of the instance document. It is gratuitously restrictive to require that this be defined only in terms of "document types". One could *design* a document type and within its definition explicitly specify the external provenance of its various parts, but that doesn't cater to one-offs or to situations of limited applicability - such as when you don't want to associate an element type with another, but rather to associate only specific instantiations of the element type with some other "template". This key feature of AFs - that it's up to a document *as an instance* to say how it maps to any exemplar - gets lost more often than any other. As for means, you mentioned having a CSS-like mechanism. In the same philosophical vein (i.e. decorating a tree) I'll mention LPDs. But you won't get away from an irreducible minimum, which is to declare, somehow, within the instance - that is, er, inline - that such ancillary information is in play. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
