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

Re: Terminology (was: RFC for XML Object Parsing)

• From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
• To: Brian Aberle <xmlboss@live.com>
• Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:25:54 -0400

On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 18:07 -0600, Brian Aberle wrote:
> Liam,
>  
> I am mildly poetic and possibly dyslexic so I have much respect for
> Arjun's comment here:
> > >...  there's no denying the attraction of short monosyllabic
> substitutes for long-winded terminology.  Hence, sadly, the ubiquitous
> misuse of 'tag'.

Yes, Arjun is a smart cookie.

[...]
> In XMLFoundation, you can obtain the address of a member mapped to an
> element or an attribute, the "Tag" in this setting is the C++ string
> of bytes used to assemble the (Attribute or Element) which ever it be.
> What would you call it?   Lets not fight about this petty stuff.  How
> about contributing an enhancement or helpful comment?
See my separate response from earlier today. I was really replying to
Arjun's question about standard terminology, I'm sorry if that wasn't
clear.
 	   		  

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

• References:
  • RFC for XML Object Parsing
    • From: Brian Aberle <xmlboss@live.com>
  • Terminology (was: RFC for XML Object Parsing)
    • From: Arjun Ray <arjun.ray@verizon.net>
  • Re: Terminology (was: RFC for XML Object Parsing)
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
  • RE: Terminology (was: RFC for XML Object Parsing)
    • From: Brian Aberle <xmlboss@live.com>