RE: Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
We were told that the average web guy wasn't very bright and was very desperate. Charles was being kind. I was hoping to do away with parameter entities up front but was told HTML made too much use of them. The not-to-be-violated requirement of SGML On The Web was HTML. It not being a very relational-like language, and not much of a tree, what you see is what you got. XML is limited to web stuff. By design. That helps to unlimit the web. len From: David Megginson [mailto:david@m...] Tim Bray writes: > Charles Goldfarb (lead designer of SGML) actually suggested that we do > this in XML, simply forbid mixed content. I'd be pretty suspicious of Charles on this point -- it would have ensured that people kept using SGML for large documentation systems and limited XML to Web stuff. I do believe that it would be useful to have a middle-level data layer (say, "XDL") on top of XML. That layer could enforce both restrictions (no mixed content) and more abstract, data-specific conventions (such as typing, if it were actually a good idea). Other data oriented specs could be built on top of it.
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