• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: PSVI formalization
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 17:00:31 +1000
• References: <200205100047.BAA12680@r...>

 From: "Richard Tobin" <richard@c...>

> Much more compact ones are possible (and as Rick points out, it
> would be much nicer is we had structured attributes!).
 
Yes, probably I should have just said "meta-attributes" though; structured
attributes per se are another issue. A psvi attribute represented by a psvi:attribute 
element in the actual XML would still be atomic, and the psvi augmentations would 
all be attributes in the actual XML.

Cheers
Rick

• References:
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: Re: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread