• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: relying on ordering of sibling XML elements
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 20:38:05 -0400
• References: <20020803160108.92831.qmail@w...><002901c23b0f$9074d800$fe193044@tbp1>

I see I typed a wrong word in my earlier post today - one that does not make
much sense in the context.  Here is what I meant (probably everyone knew
that already) -


> [Glen Mazza]
> >
> > Question - does "proper" XML document design permit
> > deriving a semantic meaning from the ordering of XML
> > sibling elements?
> >
>
> Yes and no.  As Richard Tobin just posted, the order of the
<WRONG>documents</WRONG> <INTENDED>elements</INTENDED>  is
> significant in XML.  On the other hand, the semantic value of having an
> order is up to you.  XML says nothing about it.  You are free to equate
> document order with physical order in the bookshelf if you want to, and
XML
> will respect that order for you.
>

Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • relying on ordering of sibling XML elements
    • From: Glen Mazza <glenmazza@y...>
  • Re: relying on ordering of sibling XML elements
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Next by Date: RE: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• Previous by thread: Re: relying on ordering of sibling XML elements
• Next by thread: Escaping URLs and URIs into valid xml names
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread