Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> using entities of any kind does not change the underlying data model. > It's syntactic shugar, nothing more. The root of the problem (and a > great help in other cases) is indeed the fact that any XML 1.0 > document must have a single root. >From what I know of your problem, it seems as if you are the one who is confusing implementation issues with the underlying data model. If I were faced with the same problem, my solution would be very simple. The schema (your "underlying data model") for my XML logging document would be as follows: <!ELEMENT log (entry*)> <!ELEMENT entry (#PCDATA)> My low-level logging code (where efficiency counts more than schematics) would manage a disk file in the form <entry>Nam Sybillam quidem Cumis ego oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere</entry> <entry>Pueris respondebat "Volo perire"</entry> And appending is as efficient as you please. Let us say this disk file was "/var/log/classic.log" The rest of the world (which is expecting an XML: document) would access the logs through the following <?xml version="1.0"> <!DOCTYPE log [<!ENTITY lf SYSTEM "file:/var/log/classic.log">]> <log>&lf;</log> And ta-da! We've satisfied both our efficiency and semantic concerns using XML 1.0. So where is the problem? -- Uche Ogbuji FourThought LLC, IT Consultants uche.ogbuji@f... (970)481-0805 Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets http://FourThought.com http://OpenTechnology.org 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...)
|
