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

Re: XML 1.0 - Element order significance

• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:25:31 -0500

Tim Bray wrote:

> [I]f the doc has
> 
> <brothers><matt /><jim /><luke /><dave /></brothers>
> 
> then if I don't see them in the order (m, j, l, d) that they
> appear in the document, something is wrong.  Software that 
> rearranged the elements as part of processing would be broken;

Absolutely.  Unfortunately, such software is not actually
out of compliance with XML 1.0.

> As to whether the order is "significant" in the human/design/business
> sense, that is totally language-specific, and I don't agree with
> Henry that you can reverse-engineer it from the DTD. -Tim

I think HST's point is sound, though his wording
may be unfortunate.  Let me attempt to paraphrase:

a) 
If the elements MUST appear in a specified
	order (according to the DTD or whatever),
	then the order CANNOT convey any additional
	information to the application.

b) 
If the elements MAY appear in any order (again
	according to the DTD or whatever), then the order
	which actually appears MAY convey additional
	information to the application.
-- 
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
    • From: Danny Ayers <danny@p...>
  • Re: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• References:
  • Re: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
• Next by Date: Re: Abbreviated Tag Names
• Previous by thread: Re: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
• Next by thread: RE: XML 1.0 - Element order significance
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread