[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home]
[Reply To This Message]
- From: Philip Fennell <Philip.Fennell@marklogic.com>
- To: James Clark <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 05:51:43 -0800
Unless I’ve missed something, there’s nothing here
that would prevent MicroXML from being embedded ‘in-line’ in XML
1.0 is there?
I do a fair bit of work with XForms and XProc, not to mention
XSLT, so the things that I’d see as important are:
1) Can I embed fragments of MicroXML in an xforms:instance, an
xproc:inline or an xsl:template?
2) Can I traverse the structure using XPath?
3) Would my XForms, XProc or XSLT processor need a specific
Beyond those questions, from what I’ve seen so far, I can
think of no reason not to use MicroXML as a light-weight data format but I’d
imagine I’ll still be using XML 1.0 + Namespaces for XForms, XProc and
XSLT. After all, it’s the data that’s more the problem than the XML
languages we process it with, right?
From: James Clark [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 13 December, 2010 12:40 PM
To: Dave Pawson
Subject: Re: MicroXML
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Dave Pawson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 17:29:14 +0700
> I can definitely see
advantages in this option. I would summarise it
> - no colons in element or attribute names,
> - except that attribute names can start with "xml:";
What do you lose if you omit this?
reserved xml: xxx ?
I think it's a basic requirement to be able to use the
built-in xml:lang, xml:id, xml:base attributes. Note that XML already
reserves element/attribute names starting with [Xx][Mm][Ll]. I would say it's
nice feature that these built-in attribute names look different from normal
attribute names. I see no awkwardness and no difficult for the learner.
Use full XML 1.0 (no longer micro?)
What you gain, simpler parse, no exceptions for the learner?
> - there's nothing to stop you having an attribute called
> MicroXML will treat it just like any other attribute
I.e. no exceptions, simplicity. A plus IMHO
> Big upside: guaranteed to be namespace well-formed; simpler.
> Big downside: some XML infosets cannot be expressed.
If you want that, go use XML 1.0
> I would be interested to know whether others also find this option
Lose the exception for me James.
Too little gain for more awkwardness.
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: email@example.com
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
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
Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats,
enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.
Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website.
they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please