[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes

• From: Paul Prescod <papresco@t...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:49:59 -0400

akirkpatrick@i... wrote:
> How do we stop the authors actually using <inline> and <block> which
> have little meaning as they are? Do we need a "pure virtual" syntax
> which indicates that an element type cannot be instantiated in the
> instance?

Yes, in my essay I introduce a <!CLASS ...> declaration ro abstract
supertypes.
 
> Either way, I like this idea a lot. Does the instance syntax proposal for
> XML take any of this into account? If so, I might be converted, on the
> assumption that this type of thing won't make it into the SGML revision.

Well I think that something inheritance-like is going into the revision.
We just have to push for it to be straightforward and "first-class"
rather than indirected as archforms are.

 Paul Prescod

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • RE: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes
    • From: akirkpatrick@i...

• Prev by Date: RE: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes
• Next by Date: Re: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes
• Previous by thread: RE: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes
• Next by thread: Re: Inheritance/defaulting of attributes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread