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

Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)

• To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Subject: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:24:18 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1040307239.2526.253.camel@ibook>

vdv@d... (Eric van der Vlist) writes:
>Isn't it what I have said ;-) ???

On re-reading, yes, though in the context of the conversation, the
notion that these problems come from XML 1.0 is something a lot of
people seem to have missed.

>The only way to cope with tool which are conservative in what they
>accept and perhaps liberal in what they discard is to be conservative
>in what you send!

Yes, or simply to write off those tools and not worry about it, which is
another common strategy.

>In any case, if the industry was going in that direction, we would need
>new types of schema languages: the current ones do filter the structure
>and content of XML documents without filtering any of the basic XML
>features. If XML "sub-profiles" (such as defined by SOAP) were to be
>widely used, we would also need schema languages to express the
>constraints defined by these profiles! 

This area needs a lot more consideration in the next few years.  It
seems pretty clear to me that "5-year review" ISO style has merit, even
if it doesn't explicitly mean a new version of XML.

I did some work in this area a long time ago, though it's pretty rough
and probably needs an update itself:

http://purl.oclc.org/NET/xpdl

The "profile" section is probably the most interesting in this context,
and this fragment may provide a bit of an idea why:

<!ELEMENT profile EMPTY>
<!ATTLIST profile
    fragmentIdentifier CDATA "http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xptr"
    linking CDATA "http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink"
    xinclude CDATA (yes | no) "no"
    xbase CDATA (yes | no) "no"
    namespaces (yes | no) "yes"
    namespacesonroot (yes | no) "no"
    attinheritelemns (yes | no) "yes"
>

(Yes, I know fragmentIdentifier is supposed to go into MIME Media Type
registrations.)
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org

• References:
  • Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Next by Date: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Previous by thread: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• Next by thread: Re: Common XML (was Re: Internal entities)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread