Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
"J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@y...> wrote: | Arjun Ray wrote: |>| 1. avoiding collisions |> |> A non-problem. | | Really? Yes. The associative power of the attribute mechanism in SGML/XML is enough to encode the necessary disambiguation information (without violence to the atomicity of names qua strings.) | You probably know the XSLFO spec includes an element named | instream-foreign-object, which is intended as a sort of hook | for FO processors to provide functionality which may otherwise | be awkward to provide in XSLFO. Yes. A "bridge" element, to use AF terminology. | People have expectations about the environment and tools which | handle their XML, Indeed. The tools rarely fail to reflect the assumptions of their developers. | Would you please elaborate why any of the developers and the users | of the tools mentioned above, possibly including the FO processor | writer, should see name collisions as non-problem? It's a problem for tools that can't handle it, obviously. It goes back to the developers' assumptions being misconceived.
|
