Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
thanks for the clarifications.. This illustrates what the PI in XML can do etc.. I guess if there is some security/access control aspects in XML, then probably a right perspective is: how to give access to different portions of an XML document to different users.. I will keep it in mind, if I have to review works in these areas. best, murali. On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Michael Rys wrote: > The point regarding PIs is that it is just markup and has no semantics. > Only a processor that sees the PI and understands its target will act on > it. It does not introduce "code" into XML any more or any less than an > element with a specific markup. > > For example, for SQL Server 2000 we designed a so called SQLXML > template: an XML file that contains markup with special names that > execute a query against a database. We decided to use a special > namespace and XML elements for giving this information, but > theoretically, we could have used processing-instructions as well. XSLT > processors for example interpret a special PI as an instruction to > transform an XML document containing that PI using the indicated XSLT > transform. Theoretically, XSLT could have chosen an XML element in a > special namespace for doing so. > > There are some trade-offs to be made, but neither approach is more or > less secure per se. > > Best regards > Michael
|
