• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XInclude Support
• From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 09:52:26 -0700
• In-reply-to: <5.2.0.9.0.20030509074459.06111b30@m...>
• References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030509074459.06111b30@m...>

Jonathan Robie wrote:

> How important is XInclude? Few products support it today. How strong is
> user demand for it?

My impression is that XInclude is a wrong-size-fits-nothing
kind of thing.  Other specs that need XInclude-like functionality
often need something with _slightly_ different semantics, and
end up specifying it themselves instead of reusing XInclude
(<xsl:import>, for instance).

I've developed a number of vocabularies that could have used
XInclude, but ended up using a simpler ad-hoc solution instead.
The main reasons I didn't use XInclude are: XPointer was unnecessary
for my needs (relative URIs were sufficient, I only needed whole-document
transclusion); XPointer was unimplementable (at least by me);
and in a number of cases leaving XInclude out meant I could
leave out XML namespaces as well (since nothing else in the
vocabulary called for them).


--Joe English

  jenglish@f...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XInclude Support
    • From: "J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@y...>
  • Re: XInclude Support
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• References:
  • XInclude Support
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working
• Next by Date: Re: Blended Authentication (AKA "Granular Access Control")
• Previous by thread: XInclude Support
• Next by thread: Re: XInclude Support
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread