Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>>Allowing QNames creates a dependency between the applications and the
>>markup which should not exist. It makes it more difficult to build
>>applications relying on a "virtual XML" which is never serialized as
>>XML.
>>
>
> Intriguing -- I would say exactly the opposite, i.e. that QNames provide a
> uniform way to ensure that "virtual XML" (what I think of as the
> type-enriched infoset) has (namespace name,local name) pairs in it
> wherever you want them.
Yes, you can see them like this but they do so it by accessing stuff
whithin the "markup layer" and you can't separate the markup from the
data easily any longer after you've done so.
Canonical XML is a good example of problems which happen when you do so.
I viewed Canonical XML as a way to define a normalize form of the markup
used in a document. Anyway, because of QNames may be used in the content
namespace prefixes cannot be rewriten any longer.
For me, an ideal markup language should isolate the "data" layer from
the "markup layer" and QNames in elements or attributes is the only
point that breaks this rule! IMO, this is a much too expensive price to
pay for a uniform way to ensure to support extened names.
Eric
> ht
>
--
Rendez-vous a Paris pour mes formations XML/XSLT.
http://dyomedea.com/formation/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
