Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Norman Walsh <ndw@n...> wrote: | The only significant technical objection I recall hearing against PIs | was that they didn't have globally unique names. It has always been my impression that this technical objection, while valid in its own terms, misses the mark. By original design, PIs are for application specific information, from which it follows that their use for generic purposes is overreaching. However, generic intent isn't precluded, so sometimes PIs are asked to play declarations on TV. In short, for generic semantics, effectively operating at the parsing level, a PI is a kludge. For the longer haul, either define new kinds of declarations (with MDO/MDC syntax), or establish a naming convention (such as 'xml' prefixes in XML) which identifies the PIs pinch-hitting for the lack of such declarations. IMHO, no more is needed. If someone wants to discuss whether words like ELEMENT and ATTLIST are "globally unique names" or not, they are welcome to do so, but such recondite deliberations would tend to miss the forest for the trees.
|
