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

Re: Content v. attribute

• From: len bullard <cbullard@h...>
• To: James Tauber <jtauber@j...>
• Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:53:26 -0600

James Tauber wrote:
> 
> Bear in mind that XML was designed primarily for *document* interchange. The
> attribute vs element decision (which is really just a markup vs content
> decision)  IMO, is a lot less clear in data-centric applications than it is
> in document-centric ones. XML might have looked quite different if the
> things people are doing nowadays with XML were thought up when SGML was
> being developed.

Interesting.  Xerox sold a markup based system that did exactly that.  
Elements only; no attributes.  It died on the vine.  So, regardless of 
hindsight, historically, it didn't fly.

The idea that might have made a difference to XML was the notion of 
an object with an interface and an implementation.  Many of the 
things people are doing nowadays with XML were thought up 
in the context of programming languages.

Len Bullard

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: Content v. attribute
    • From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@j...>

• Prev by Date: c++ parser for DOM
• Next by Date: RE: DTD for X12 or EDIFACT
• Previous by thread: Re: Content v. attribute
• Next by thread: Re: Content v. attribute
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread