Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: xml 2.0 - so it's on the way after all?
 I have relatively few problems with the notion of an entity (even a parameterized entity) being in XML 2.0 - the problem that I have currently is that the entity mechanism that currently exists is tied to the DTD world exclusively. XInclude is not as "elegant" from a handcrafting standpoint, but from an XML processing standpoint it makes much more sense, especially in the presence of XPointer. I personally would prefer to see <x:include href="myUrl#foo"/> over "&foo;", or at worst some kind of glossary referencing structure a la XSLT: <x:entity name="foo">Here's my boiler-plate text</x:entity> <x:entity name="bar" href='myUrl#bar'/> <x:ref name="foo"/><x:ref name="bar"/> The single area where this does prove problematic is in character references. Even there, if you permit entities, I still think that their declaration should be something handled as angle-bracket XML: <x:char-entity name="nbsp" charset="UTF-8" charcode="160"/> This is a fixed space. In this case, entities would be limited ONLY to character entities in XML 2.0. -- Kurt On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:29:30 -0800, Robert Koberg <rob@k...> wrote: > Peter Hunsberger wrote: > > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:04:09 -0800, Robert Koberg <rob@k...> wrote: > > > >>Amelia A Lewis wrote: > >> > >>>On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 10:20:42PM +0200, Toni Uusitalo wrote: > > > > > > <snip/> > > > >>>At present, there's no apparent activity targeted toward providing an > >>>alternate entity-definition mechanism. > >> > >>Don't know if you followed the Ant(ish) thread but we use Ant and its > >>filter capabilities to do what entities do. For example, on copying > >>files(ets) like: > >> > >><p>blah blah @psuedoentity@ blah<p> > >> > >>is replaced with its property definition. > >> > >>Alternatively you could use XInclude. > >> > >>Entities blow and are unnecessary. > > > > > > Sure, or just use XSLT and a bunch of other attached machinery. > > > > Somehow this strikes me like telling someone that they don't need a > > trunk on their favorite sports car and if they really want to haul > > groceries around they should go buy a 20 ton dump truck... > > I guess I see it different. To keep entities would be more like asking > everyone to own a 20ton dump truck. I guess I don't understand your > point... The thread is about xml moving forward. Enitites are an anchor. > Are you saying entities should be left to draw to an indefinite length? > > > > > (Not that I'm a fan of entities either.) > > > > Then why are you arguing? > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php> > > -- Kurt Cagle http://www.understandingxml.com 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
