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

RE: more on "subelement signicance"

• From: mrossi@c...
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 16:59:04 -0400

Bob,
     You took the words right out of my mouth with 1). As for your
argument, be careful. As Len said, the philosophers are going to start
pipin' up. :-) Why is it really that you know what's meant by xref and
emph?

Michael A. Rossi
Computer Sciences Corporation
mailto:mrossi@c...
856-983-4400 x4911


                                                                                                                         
                    "DuCharme, Bob                                                                                       
                    (LNG)"                     To:     xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>                                   
                    <bob.ducharme@lexis        cc:                                                                       
                    nexis.com>                 Subject:     RE:  more on "subelement signicance"                
                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                         


Seairth Jacobs wrote:

>The usefulness of any given subelement is due to the knowledge of its
>namespace, document type, and/or parent element.  Without any of the
>three the subelement does not have a useful meaning.

I can think of many specific questions, but I'll start with the general
ones:

1. Why subelement? Why not "The usefulness of any given element"?

2. The "and/or" confuses me. Are you saying that, for a (sub)element to
have
some meaning, one or more of (namespace, document type, parent element)
must
be known? That if only one is known, the element may have some usefulness?
(I'm not arguing this point, just looking for some clarification.)

Now I'll argue: there are certain element type names used often enough in
enough contexts that their usefulness can be inferred without knowing
either
their namespace, document type, or parent, e.g. xref and emph. (I would
rule
out h1, <a href=""/>, and p as examples because we generally do assume a
particular doctype for them based on common usage.)

• Prev by Date: Re: more on "subelement signicance"
• Next by Date: RE: Are subelements significant by themselves?
• Previous by thread: Re: more on "subelement signicance"
• Next by thread: RE: more on "subelement signicance"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread