Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Is this not precisely the reason that 'behaviour' (or whatever we are eventually to call it) of XLinks is indispensable? Not as a replacement for the document-centric assumptions that text order is meaningful or that the implicit parent-child relationship of element containment is significant, but as the mechanism for specifying (granted, to a perhaps more data-oriented audience) either where these relationships should be explicit, or where they are replaced by explicitly presented alternatives. Respectfully, Walter Perry Rick Jelliffe wrote: > Perhaps a major part of the problem is that sometimes the document order > is meaningful and other times just an artifact of there being no "&" > connector in XML content models, and there is no way to decide. And > when the order is important, there is no way to label what its > significance is; indeed, the same thing is true of every axis including > the children and parent axes. 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...)
|
