Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 2015-01-22 09:49 -0500, Toby Considine wrote: I've used the distinctions between "a standard XML vocabulary" (published by committee following formal governance procedures, e.g. W3C XHTML, OASIS DocBook, OASIS UBL), "a de facto XML vocabulary" (something everyone can use but hasn't been formally published by a standards-setting body, e.g. Jonathan and Tim's RDDL, my LiterateXSLT) and "a colloquial XML vocabulary" (something thrown together to get a job done but you wouldn't want other people to use it or even see it, e.g. I'm not going to show you what I've had to do sometimes).While we are passing these nuances around, is there a similar short phrase that conveys whether the XML uses public open semantics, proprietary semantics or ad-hoc semantics? These adjectives have worked well for me. . . . . . . . . Ken -- Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources | Free 5-hour lecture: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/video.htm | Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/ | G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@C... | Google+ profile: http://plus.google.com/+GKenHolman-Crane/about | Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal | --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
