Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 09:51 PM 10/12/00 +0800, Rick JELLIFFE wrote: >So would people be happier with > * a much more comprehensive Primer That would certainly help. > * splitting the Structures draft into two or three parts that were > more self contained I'd love to see that - among other things, it would help make the various proposals for subsetting more coherent. While it's less of a problem on the datatypes end, it might also be useful to describe simple usage of datatypes - minus facets, for instance. > * a much terser algorithmic/logical treatment of the subject, less > comprehensible to Joe Database but smaller and more precise Given that XML 1.0 provides a formal grammar and options for subverting it in the text (options like not loading external resources), I'd be concerned that a straight logic version might not be compatible with the full version, but it would be useful to one class of spec user, certainly. > * a rewrite of structures based on the concrete syntax rather than > having the abstract components first This is the one I hear most often at conferences, typically from the subset-oriented folks. >Knowing some specifics might be helpful. > >Even knowing at what point you become confused might help: I know >paragraph clarification is not Simon's preferred way, but it is >not a waste of time. It may not be a waste of time, but it makes me feel like I'm putting band-aids on a major wound and no more. Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. XHTML: Migrating Toward XML http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
|
