• From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@j...>
• To: "XML-Dev Mailing list" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 20:38:57 +0800

I'm starting to put some options into FOP that are triggered by processing
instructions. My initial thought was use 'fop' as the target.

But then it occurred to me: PI targets can be associated with a URI via a
NOTATION declaration. This is *a lot* like namespaces. Does that mean PI
targets should be arbitrary proxies?

Instead of looking for PIs with the target "fop" should I instead be looking
for PIs with the target which is a NOTATION declared with URI
http://www.jtauber.com/fop/
After all, some other application might use the target "fop" but only mine
would use the NOTATION with URI http://www.jtauber.com/fop/.

What do people think?

James
--
James Tauber / jtauber@j... / www.jtauber.com
Associate Researcher, Electronic Commerce Network
Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia

Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com,  www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net






xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Are PI targets arbitrary?
    • From: james anderson <James.Anderson@m...>
  • Re: Are PI targets arbitrary?
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
  • Re: Are PI targets arbitrary?
    • From: Tyler Baker <tyler@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Word and XML (was: XML standards coherency and so forth)
• Next by Date: Re: Are PI targets arbitrary?
• Previous by thread: DDML Documentation Capabilities
• Next by thread: Re: Are PI targets arbitrary?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread