Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Haven't heard from anybody on my attribute-value vs. content positioning: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/xml-dev-Nov-1999/1137.html In any case, I see value to the end user in being able to succinctly represent data using attributes. Users want readable XML. Although I'm usually in the use-elements-not-attributes camp, it's not clear to me that we should enforce this. Not having attributes may cost SML significant user base. I only wish it were a syntactic trick and not also a semantic one. I wish XML had made the following two elements equivalent: <product><price>$1.00</price></product> <product price="$1.00"/> Namespaces would have been simpler, users wouldn't have had to worry over whether to design attributes or elements into the doctype, and supporting technologies such as XPath would be more robust, as queries would then survive syntactic changes in the underlying doctype. Is there any way to fix this in SML? Are we bound by semantic compatibility with XML processors? ... plus we need a way to support XML namespaces (see that SML thread). -- Joe Lapp (Looking for some good people to Senior Engineer help create XML technologies that http://www.webMethods.com connect businesses to businesses jlapp@w... over the web.) 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
