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

Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document

• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Subject: Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:54:18 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020123114111.023206a0@p...>
• Sender: lgp@c...

Tim Bray wrote:

> At 11:01 AM 23/01/02 -0500, Jonathan Borden wrote:
> >Looking at 3 in particular, RDDL in its current form assists the task of
> >3.1 and a RDDL PI would assist the task of 3.2. Would this be useful?
> >
> ><?rddl-doctype href="http://example.org/some-rddl-description.html" ?>
>
> Blecch.  Assuming you believe that this is a good idea, stick it
> in a namespaced tribute required to be on the root element.  Then
> you can get at it through all the existing APIs and address it
> with XPath and so on.
>
> PIs are for application-specific processing IMHO.  This is not
> application-specific at all. -Tim

Point of clarification:

I will count that as a "no" vote for <?rddl-doctype href="..." ?>
Is that yes,no or neutral on <foo:bar rddl:doctype="...">? ***

note: I remain truly ambivalent about the issue of document types, and am
hoping for a really persuasive argument one way or the other along the lines
of "If a document lands on my desk, this approach is not useful"

Jonathan

*** who refuses to divulge the exact algorithm used to tally xml-dev votes
:-))

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• References:
  • Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Compound processing
• Next by Date: Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
• Previous by thread: Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
• Next by thread: Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread