Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mixed content: selecting c

John E. Simpson wrote:

> Actually, though, I think the more granular/atomic the structure, the more
> flexibility downstream -- not just for XSL, but for querying and (yes) data
> interchange. For applications, it's easy to extract the structured data you
> want, even if apparently overly-nested, and ignore those portions of the
> structure that you don't... but harder (and needing more hard-coding and
> application-specific intelligence) to *add* structure to the source where
> it's no better than implicit.

I agree completely - finding the correct degree of granularity is indeed the
trick. It's true that it's much easier to ignore unnecessary structure than it
is to imply non-existent tags, but any markup that can't be implied is
expensive - if it can be implied, then it might be of only marginal value.


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mrc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list