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

Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web

• From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
• To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
• Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:25:08 +0000

On 13/12/2010 03:15, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> The script element in thehttp://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml  namespace has already been implemented. How would a new processing instruction be better?

XML is designed (mostly) not to use fixed element names. If you are 
styling xhtml, xhtml:script is OK, but if you are styling docbook, or 
some personal xml vocabulary or anything else other than xhtml, then 
adding a processing instruction will maintain the validity of your 
source, but adding an xhtml:script will not.

David


________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>

• References:
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@prodigal.ca>
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Doug <doug.duboulay@gmail.com>
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
  • Re: RE: James Clark: XML versus the Web
    • From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>