• From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
• To: David <dlee@c...>
• Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 08:12:22 +0100

On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:15:03 -0400
David <dlee@c...> wrote:

> 
> > For the sake of  argument, lets say the author and xml geek
> > sit down together and the author generates plain text, the geek
> > styles it via markup *selected by the author*, if she understands
> > tha italics means a medicine, fine. Then we have something like
> > <medicine s:use-attribute-sets='italics'>Asprin</medicine>
> > I'm choosing xsl-fo syntax for want of anything better.
> >
> >
> >    
> 
> I'm not entirely sure what your question or intent is here.
> I do find this example intriguing as it is in some ways a simple 
> solution to 'overlapping markup' (well, as long as the overlaps start 
> and end at the same place :).
> It encodes as 'primary' the semantic markup ( "medicine") and encodes
> as secondary a presentation 'hint'  ("italics").  This implies
> elsewhere you might want to have medicine in bold instead ...

Yes, same way that XSLT uses this indirection, simply for efficiency.


> 
> But I'm curious what your underlying question or point is.  Are you 
> asking if this is "good style" ? or "prevalent in the real world?" or 
> something different ?


I was asking if any other work has been done in this area.
It's largely been a sacred cow since XML, I no longer take
that view. 

regards


-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xml + style.
    • From: David <dlee@c...>

• References:
  • xml + style.
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: xml + style.
    • From: Greg Hunt <greg@f...>
  • Re: xml + style.
    • From: David <dlee@c...>
  • Re: xml + style.
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: xml + style.
    • From: David <dlee@c...>