Re: feature request

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:

> Eric van der Vlist writes:
>  > The other form (using entities) seems to have defenders amongst the
>  > SGMLers.
>
> I dont think you need read very far between the lines to find that
> there is a considerable band of people who would ban entities tomorrow
> if they could, in favour of Xlink etc.

First, I don't think I consider myself an SGMLer so much as an XML
1.0er. It is fairly easy to get a heterogenous system up and running
across various organizations when XML 1.0 is the target, but once you
say it has to be XML 1.0 + Xlink + Namespaces + XSLT ...and so on, you
start running into roadblocks, escpecially when you don't have complete
control of the various tools used across organizations. The fact that
Xlink is not part of XML 1.0 is why I treat it as an enhancement vs. a
critical piece of the system. In XML 1.0, entities are the most flexible
and widely supported way to manage external relationships, so that's
what I use. 

Rick Geimer
National Semiconductor
rick.geimer@xxxxxxx


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