• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: nested namespaces
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:31:08 -0500
• In-reply-to: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F804B7C731@R...>

dareo@m... (Dare Obasanjo) writes:
>The XML in this example isn't as perverse (i.e boneheaded) as in your
>original claims.

Is it a markup style you would recommend?  "Isn't as perverse" sounds
pretty seriously hedged.

> Even then I only see two answers 
>
>A.) recursively filter for only the items you care about (my stylesheet
>and query examples) 
>
>B.) process XML based on agreed upon processing rules
>
>Trying to come up with a "generic" mechanism for processing XML in such
>situations seems like a fools errand. 

That sounds to me like a point against creating this kind of XML.
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org

• References:
  • RE: nested namespaces
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Sean McGrath hits a home run
• Next by Date: Re: Billion laughs hits BugTraq
• Previous by thread: RE: nested namespaces
• Next by thread: RE: nested namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread