Re: On the promotion and demotion of information items (was Re
On Thursday 06 March 2003 11:00, Rick Jelliffe wrote: > > Hmmm. I think they should have just put the information in attributes and > > been done with it. People are free to ignore attributes they're not > > interested in. > > Err, except that then the originators would say "oh we don't think this is > important enough for non-humans" in which case it would have been be left > out and Daniella would be left hopeless. But I don't think that justifies having a middle ground, let alone using comments as that middle ground. Why bother marking information as potentially useless? If you're already going to the effort of including it, why not put it in an attribute somewhere rather than in a comment? > > What happens to this .Net config file if you strip out the comments? > > Presumably something breaks > > Why presumably? Who know what the user wants to make of the information. Well, the example given didn't look human readable, implying that some kind of machine processing was performed on the comments by whatever is supposed to read it... > Maybe a future XML should have a few extra kinds of tags with clearly > specified statuses in this regard: for example, a kind of tag used for > "computer information whose format is variable and which may not be > maintained through the document set" or "data that uses some simple > datatype" or "information only present to make it difficult to convert into > ASN.1" and so on. Ahah! Now I understand! This support for hiding meaningful information in comments where no schema can mandate it is a bid by the infoset-haters to discredit anything that transports infosets! :-) > > Cheers > Rick Jelliffe > ABS -- A city is like a large, complex, rabbit - ARP
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